Urgent Help Required with lowells

[citizenB]

Right well you can prove that both the £1.00 and £10.00 were the required fees for both the CCA and SAR and they cannot be used to set the statute barred clock. As far as you are concerned the last payment made was in 2002 and therefore the debt is statute barred.

 

End of story.

 

As advised, make a complaint to the OFT and copy it to Lowells.

[citizenB]

YOu should resend the statute barred letter from the CAG library.. link below..

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?408-Letter-sent-when-debt-is-statute-barred

 

but add the following somewhere in the letter

 

 

The payments you claim were made to the account were in fact the legally required fees for requests made under the CCA 1974 = £1.00 on DATE and a Subject Access Request made under DPA1998 = £10.00 on DATE.

 

The last payment made to this account was in 2002 therefore this account is now statute barred.

 

HTH

[havinastella]

Also as DX has stated, CHECK her credit record.

 

If Lowells have messed with it, Sue them for damages!

 

Jogs

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

If you have documented proof that the £1 payment was

specifically noted and marked as for statutory fee only no

problem, do you have a copy of the letter sent with the £1

payment, if so send a complaint to the OFT with copies of

all the correspondence.

As said check CRA files in this case all 3 Equifax, Experian

and call credit.

[kurvaface]

The number to ring for trading standards is

 

08454 040506

[kiltedman]

I figured i could send something like this, (sorry not much good at letter writing)

 

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY OR ANY COMPANY YOU CLAIM TO REPRESENT

Lowell Group

Enterprise House

1 Apex View

Leeds

LS11 9BH

 

Date 07/12/2011

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Acc/Ref No

 

 

You have contacted me regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself.

 

The payment you claim were made to the account was in fact the legally required fee for request made under the CCA 1974 = £1.00 on 15 october 2010.

 

The last payment made to this account was in 2002 therefore this account is now statute barred.

 

I would point out that under The Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 Part 1 Section 6 "If, after the appropriate date, an obligation to which this section applies has subsisted for a continuous period of 5 years:

 

(a) without any relevant claim having been made in relation to the obligation, and

(b) without the subsistence of the obligation having been relevantly acknowledged,

then as from the expiration of that period the obligation shall be extinguished:"

 

I would also point out that the OFT say under their Debt Collection Guidance on statute barred debt that "it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period".

 

The last acknowledgement of this alleged debt was made over five years ago. Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written contact from myself in the relevant period under Part 1 Section 6 of The Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 , I would respectfully suggest that you are no longer able to take any court action against myself to recover the alleged amount claimed.

 

Should you continue to pursue this account without providing this evidence I shall seek an interdict and damages accordingly. A formal complaint will also be made to Trading Standards along with a report to the OFT questioning your fitness to hold a consumer credit license.

 

I await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed and that no further contact will be made concerning the above account after that last letter.

 

Please also forward me a copy of your complaints procedure as i wish to raise a formal complaint regarding this matter and the attempted fraud that you have undertaken.

 

For your information.

 

The Offences

 

Section 1 creates a general offence of fraud and introduces three ways of committing it set out in Sections 2, 3 and 4.

 

Fraud by false representation (Section 2);

Fraud by failure to disclose information when there is a legal duty to do so (Section 3); and

Fraud by abuse of position (Section 4).

 

In each case:

 

the defendant's conduct must be dishonest;

his/her intention must be to make a gain; or cause a loss or the risk of a loss to another.

No gain or loss needs actually to have been made.

The maximum sentence is 10 years' imprisonment.

 

Fraud by false representation (Section 2)

 

The defendant:

 

made a false representation

dishonestly

knowing that the representation was or might be untrue or misleading

with intent to make a gain for himself or another, to cause loss to another or to expose another to risk of loss.

 

I believe that by trying to pass off the legally required fee for request made under the CCA 1974 as a payment you are committing the act of fraud. I have proof that the alleged payment was infact a legally required fee for a CCA request, I also have many documents that were provided under a Subject access request by Cl Finance that proof that the last payment/contact on the alleged account was 2002, they bought the alleged debt in 2004 and no other payments have ever been paid to this alleged account.

 

I look forward to your reply.

 

Yours faithfully

[Bazooka Boo]

I wouldn't stipulate what offences you believe they have committed, only a Judge can make that decision.

 

IMO a letter along the lines of;

Dear Bill&Ben,

 

Thank you for your latest response to my letter dated dd/mm/yyyy in which I informed you that this account was now subject to the limitation act.

I have forwarded your misguided response on to my local MP and the OFT as well as trading standards, I have asked all three to advise me further as to my legal position regarding your fraudulent claim that my payments of the statutory fees of £1 for the CCA and £10 for the SAR have some how reset the limitation period.

I look forward to their response as I do yours, that you are now closing your inaccurate files and will no longer be pursuing myself for this statute barred debt, any and all other contact by yourselves to the contrary will result in a report being made to the Police for the criminal offence of harassment.

Do NOT ignore this letter, valid even if not read by you, ACT immediately, if there is any content of this letter which you fail to understand then you are advised to seek immediate professional advice.

 

Good day.

[kiltedman]

Latest update....

 

This is the letter i sent them, and i think things have crossed in the post as we have received another letter. so will give them sometime to reply.

 

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY OR ANY COMPANY YOU CLAIM TO REPRESENT

Lowell Group

Enterprise House

1 Apex View

Leeds

LS11 9BH

 

Date 07/12/2011

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Acc/Ref No

 

 

You have contacted me regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself.

 

The payment you claim were made to the account was in fact the legally required fee for request made under the CCA 1974 = £1.00 on 15 october 2010.

 

The last payment made to this account was in 2002 therefore this account is now statute barred.

 

I would point out that under The Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 Part 1 Section 6 "If, after the appropriate date, an obligation to which this section applies has subsisted for a continuous period of 5 years:

 

(a) without any relevant claim having been made in relation to the obligation, and

(b) without the subsistence of the obligation having been relevantly acknowledged,

then as from the expiration of that period the obligation shall be extinguished:"

 

I would also point out that the OFT say under their debt collection Guidance on statute barred debt that "it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period".

 

The last acknowledgement of this alleged debt was made over five years ago. Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written contact from myself in the relevant period under Part 1 Section 6 of The Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 , I would respectfully suggest that you are no longer able to take any court action against myself to recover the alleged amount claimed.

 

Should you continue to pursue this account without providing this evidence I shall seek an interdict and damages accordingly. A formal complaint will also be made to Trading Standards along with a report to the OFT questioning your fitness to hold a consumer credit license.

 

I await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed and that no further contact will be made concerning the above account after that last letter.

 

Please also forward me a copy of your complaints procedure as i wish to raise a formal complaint regarding this matter and the attempted fraud that you have undertaken.

 

 

Here is the link to the letest letter, could you guys have a look and let me know what my next step could be....

http://i871.photobucket.com/albums/ab276/kiltedman/lowell6.jpg

 

Kiltedman

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Hi, The latest letter is just another computer

generated threatogram, I seriously doubt as

you say that they have even read your letter

as they are probably only uo to book e of Janet

and John ( no words longer than 4 letters) so

ignore this one.

[dx100uk]

ckecked her cra file yet?

 

dx

[kiltedman]

Hi Guys,

Its that time again... Another update..

 

My mother just received this letter - http://i871.photobucket.com/albums/ab276/kiltedman/Lowell7.jpg dispite the last letter that we sent. Also today she received a phonecall from them (unknown how they got her ex-directory number) but she just hung up on them. i have said to her that if they phone back to only say ( I will only deal in writing) then hang up. I will also be adding the number to the phones block list.

 

Any ideas

[42man]

Edit this as required and send recorded delivery.

 

Dear sirs I am in receipt of your recent letter dated (XXXXX)

 

Despite your recent correspondence, you have not provided me with a legible agreement that contains all the prescribed terms as laid out by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 in reply to my legal request for a copy of my agreement. Moreover I contend that the alleged debt is statute barred and that the £1 payment that you have was in lieu of the legal payment as required by the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

I am afraid that I consider that this account is still in dispute, and furthermore your attempts to provide me with potentially fraudulent documents will not be accepted. and I will not continue to get into any kind of 'litigation' via the postal service, I will only add to this by saying that I will be sending both yours and my correspondence to the Office Of Fair Trading.

 

If it is your intention to take this to court then it will be defended most vigorously.

 

I suggest you re-read the contents my last letters and I will refer you to the legal cases of Link vs Harrison and British Gas vs Ferguson and the judges stance on harrassment on both occasions I will finish by adding the case of Arkell v. Pressdram

 

I trust this makes my position completely clear.

[kiltedman]

Yep it's that time again, more letters from Lowells,

 

Here are the latest two letters that have arrived from these guys - http://i871.photobucket.com/albums/ab276/kiltedman/Lowell8.jpg , http://i871.photobucket.com/albums/ab276/kiltedman/Lowell9.jpg . Doesnt seem to matter what letters i send they just keep sending my mum letters regardless. I remember reading somewhere that she may be able to claim harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of Justice Act 1970.

 

Are any of you guys familiar with this??

 

Any advice greatly apprieciated.

 

P.s forgot to say she lives in scotland

 

Kiltedman

[kiltedman]

This is what i have found about the Administration of justice act 1970.

 

The Administration of Justice Act 1970.

 

Section 40 of the act provides that a person commits an offence if, with the object of coercing another person to pay money claimed from the other as a debt due under contract, he or she:

 

1. harasses the other with demands for payment which by their frequency, or the manner or occasion of their making, or any accompanying threat or publicity are calculated to subject him or his family or household to alarm, distress or humiliation;
   
2. falsely represents, in relation to the money claimed, that criminal proceedings lie for failure to pay it;
   
3. falsely represent themselves to be authorised in some official capacity to claim or enforce payment;
   
4. utters a document falsely represented by him to have some official character or purporting to have some official character which he knows it has not.
   

Paragraph (1) above does not apply to anything done by a person which is reasonable (and otherwise legal) for the purpose of:

 

• of securing the discharge of an obligation due, or believed by him to be due, to himself or to persons for whom he acts, or protecting himself or them from future loss; or
  
• of the enforcement of any liability by legal process.
  

It is also provided that a person may be guilty of an offence under paragraph (1) above if he concerts with others in the taking of such action as is described in that paragraph, notwithstanding that his own course of conduct does not by itself amount to harassment.

 

from - http://www.debthelpuk.co.uk/administration-of-justice-act-1970.html

[citizenB]

Ok, so you have sent them the statute barred letter and they have ignored it.. I have linked a follow up statute barred letter for you to send to their Head/Registered office either Recorded or Special Delivery.

 

This is the statute barred letter you have already sent them.. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?424-Statute-Barred-Letter-SCOTLAND

 

The letter below is a follow up.. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?420-Letter-to-use-if-a-DCA-still-try-to-collect-after-Statute-Barred - however, you will need to amend slightly in respect of the SB time.. in Scotland it is 5 years

 

 

As you will see, it actually includes reference to harrassment.. HTH

[unclebulgaria67]

I think you should also add a sentence to the letter about the £1 sent last year being in respect of a CCA request only. Therefore if they are relying on this to believe that the account is not statute barred, then they are mistaken.

[kiltedman]

Well Folks it must be that time of year again.....

 

After hearing nothing since feburary about this alleged debt, a letter appears today saying that

 

" As you have failed to repay your account, it will be sent to LUCAS CREDIT SERVICES who are one of our approved debt collection agencies. they will be instructed to pursue you for this debt and seek to recover the full balance. All contract and correspondence should be referred to this company from 14/06/12. Prior to this date, you can still contact us and make arrgements to repay your account by offering payment in full, or by setting up a monthly repayment plan for an amount of money you can realistically afford. If you do this your account will not be transferred to the debt collection agency named in this letter.

 

Lucas Credit Services

2A

606 Business Park

Straithgate Lane

Bradford

BD6 1YA

Tel - 01274957060 "

 

now should i send a dispute letter to lowells then wait and send on the these other muppets, or just ignore and wait for the letters from Lucus and send them one then along with a statue barred letter??

 

Thanx for any help

[unclebulgaria67]

Wait for Lucas to contact you and then send them the statute barred letter. Scanning this thread, I think you have indicated it is statute barred and no proof to the contrary has been provided.

 

I suspect that you will find that the debt will be passed around for a few years, until some company eventually writes it off.

 

Your debt will be one of thousands on the same spreadsheet and they will not have looked at the file to see what correspondence has been received. As you have not entered into payment arrangements, you remain on the spreadsheet and this information is used at the point of sale to issue a standard letter via mail merge, advising that it has been sold on. That is the way, I suspect it works, based on so many account in dispute, just being sold on.

[citizenB]

If you have already written to the DCA advising this account is statute barred, then they should not be pursuing or instructing anyone else to pursue.

 

Below is a follow up letter where you have already advised statute barred status and you are not amused at their antics.

 

Send it by RD and copy it to Lucas with a free proof of posting.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?420-Letter-to-use-if-a-DCA-still-try-to-collect-after-Statute-Barred