Lowells and Cap1 debt CCA return - help

[aristilus]

Hi, yes attached, looks like i'll have to accept?

 

 

will offer the same payments i have my other creditors £1 per month,

 

 

which my other creditors have accepted.

 

 

what's your thoughts ,

 

 

or should i try a CCA solicitor,

 

 

i know one locally,

 

 

uppose it wouldn't harm to ask ???

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Hi, yes attached, looks like i'll have to accept? will offer the same payments i have my other creditors £1 per month, which my other creditors have accepted. what's your thoughts , or should i try a CCA solicitor,i know one locally, suppose it wouldn't harm to ask ???

 

aristilus I don't see your address provided on this alleged agreement, was it there, have you redacted it.

[aristilus]

aristilus I don't see your address provided on this alleged agreement, was it there, have you redacted it.

 

hi, thanks for speedy reply

 

 

i wasn't sure if i had attached letters from Lowell,

 

 

will attac:-x now, and they had sent me 3xsets of doc's

 

1: with capitol one on the front, and inside was the T&Cs belonging to someone else from the Rbs

 

2: said original agreement, no name on the front of document,

 

3: was default agreement, no name on that either:

 

i'm now tring to attached letter of explaination from lowell, but computer slow...

 

cheers

[aristilus]

....

Edited October 31, 2014 by aristilus
wrong pdf

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

hi, thanks for speedy reply i wasn't sure if i had attached letters from Lowell, will attac:-x now, and they had sent me 3xsets of doc's

1: with capitol one on the front, and inside was the T&Cs belonging to someone else from the Rbs

2: said original agreement, no name on the front of document,

3: was default agreement, no name on that either:

i'm now tring to attached letter of explaination from lowell, but computer slow...

cheers

 

 

A reconstituted agreement must have.

 

 

Your name and address as at the inception of the agreement and the closure and the same for the creditor.

The Complete Ts & Cs at inception and closure.

All material amendments to the Ts & Cs during the life of the agreement.

Any document mentioned in the Ts & Cs.

 

Without all these parts the recon fails to satisfy the CCA request.

[aristilus]

hi briggadier, page 9, does have my name and address in it ?

page 15-19 are the RBs T/Cs for somebody else?

i dont miind letting this go to court, as i'm 66 on pension credit, and my other creditors 2x accept £1per month ?

whats your thoughts, or is there parts that are missing? cheers :???:if there is could you point me to thepage #s, cheers

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

hi briggadier, page 9, does have my name and address in it ?

page 15-19 are the RBs T/Cs for somebody else?

i dont miind letting this go to court, as i'm 66 on pension credit, and my other creditors 2x accept £1per month ?

whats your thoughts, or is there parts that are missing? cheers :???:if there is could you point me to thepage #s, cheers

The RBS data is enough to reject the recon outright.

 

It's very hard to assess what is missing or is relevant.

 

 

This is a bad mistake by Lowell, if I may I'd like to think on approach to get Lowell to back down completely if you can wait for an answer?

[unclebulgaria67]

Hi, yes attached, looks like i'll have to accept? will offer the same payments i have my other creditors £1 per month, which my other creditors have accepted. what's your thoughts , or should i try a CCA solicitor,i know one locally, suppose it wouldn't harm to ask ???

 

No don't make any offer, if the CCA request contains info related to RBS belonging to someone else.

 

Wait to see what the Brig says. Maybe a reply saying that Lowells have failed to comply with the CCA request, which has included information related to an RBS account in the name of a third party. Say that you are not satisfied that the documents supplied relate to your account and that if they are a reconstituted version they have failed to supply all of the information required.

 

It would probably be better to enter into a dispute about the CCA request, while being a little vague. If you are too specific they will just come back answering each question you put and try to correct the situation.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

No don't make any offer, if the CCA request contains info related to RBS belonging to someone else.

 

Wait to see what the Brig says. Maybe a reply saying that Lowells have failed to comply with the CCA request, which has included information related to an RBS account in the name of a third party. Say that you are not satisfied that the documents supplied relate to your account and that if they are a reconstituted version they have failed to supply all of the information required.

 

It would probably be better to enter into a dispute about the CCA request, while being a little vague. If you are too specific they will just come back answering each question you put and try to correct the situation.

 

 

That is exactly the point UB the inclusion of data relating to 3rd party (RBS) and possibly disclosing information, in my opinion totally disqualifies the recon.

 

 

No offers don't give in to them while I still have time here I'll try to put something together.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

No don't make any offer, if the CCA request contains info related to RBS belonging to someone else.

 

Wait to see what the Brig says. Maybe a reply saying that Lowells have failed to comply with the CCA request, which has included information related to an RBS account in the name of a third party. Say that you are not satisfied that the documents supplied relate to your account and that if they are a reconstituted version they have failed to supply all of the information required.

 

It would probably be better to enter into a dispute about the CCA request, while being a little vague. If you are too specific they will just come back answering each question you put and try to correct the situation.

 

 

Exactly my point UB, the inclusion of the RBS data is a big mistake and certainly makes the recon non compliant.

 

 

If I have enough time left here I will attempt to put something together to put Lowell away for good on this.

[dx100uk]

attachment shows your name

 

 

un-approved

 

 

dx

[aristilus]

attachment shows your name

 

 

un-approved

 

 

dx

 

 

i've corrected it now whew !

Edited October 31, 2014 by aristilus

[aristilus]

Exactly my point UB, the inclusion of the RBS data is a big mistake and certainly makes the recon non compliant.

 

 

If I have enough time left here I will attempt to put something together to put Lowell away for good on this.

 

 

cheers, greatly appreciated

[aristilus]

i've corrected it now whew !aghhhhhh

Edited October 31, 2014 by aristilus

[aristilus]

Hi, sure any help is very welcomed,

made an error on letter ,

left my name,i've corrected it now whew !

Edited October 31, 2014 by aristilus

[aristilus]

HI, cheers, thanks for help

[aristilus]

Exactly my point UB, the inclusion of the RBS data is a big mistake and certainly makes the recon non compliant.

 

 

If I have enough time left here I will attempt to put something together to put Lowell away for good on this.

 

Hi Brigadier, hope you have a bit of time over the weekend, would love to do what you suggest: just want to get it right cheers :

[aristilus]

Hi Brigadier, hope you have a bit of time over the weekend, would love to do what you suggest: just want to get it right cheers :

 

hi brigadier, i just noticed a few things that may be of interest:

the reverse side of it does ( it is the same)

 

the front of the T/C from CApitol one , which i've kept since 2009 is slightly different ? with some reference numbers not matching:

 

my name address is the same:

 

but it is definetly a reconstructed document as i say there is a reference number that is different. and as pointed out here in my docs' that the accompanying page is a third party's T/C from a RBS account:

on this note alone i could write back to owell stating that what they have sent does not meet with my request for a copy of my agreement and they have sent incorrect data material/details relatiing to a third part acc !

 

this i would assume cause a bit of a stir, at the very least or should i let them know,

i can post if you think this is useful ?

[ims21]

You don't need to chase a CCA request...waste of a stamp.

 

You know the document is incorrect and that they cannot enforce in court all the time they do not comply. The longer they are in default the better.

 

If you stir things up they will more than likely come up with a compliant document.

[aristilus]

You don't need to chase a CCA request...waste of a stamp.

 

You know the document is incorrect and that they cannot enforce in court all the time they do not comply. The longer they are in default the better.

 

If you stir things up they will more than likely come up with a compliant document.

 

 

many thanks for confirmaton, will just wait to see what they do next,

[ims21]

[unclebulgaria67]

hi brigadier, i just noticed a few things that may be of interest:

the reverse side of it does ( it is the same)

 

the front of the T/C from CApitol one , which i've kept since 2009 is slightly different ? with some reference numbers not matching:

 

my name address is the same:

 

but it is definetly a reconstructed document as i say there is a reference number that is different. and as pointed out here in my docs' that the accompanying page is a third party's T/C from a RBS account:

on this note alone i could write back to owell stating that what they have sent does not meet with my request for a copy of my agreement and they have sent incorrect data material/details relatiing to a third part acc !

 

this i would assume cause a bit of a stir, at the very least or should i let them know,

i can post if you think this is useful ?

 

If I were you, I would reply to Lowell saying that the documents sent do not appear to comply with the CCA request requirements,

as they are a reconstituted copy, with documents missing or information included in error.

 

 

Then say that Lowells have sent information related to a third parties RBS account, as part of the CCA request fulfilment.

 

 

So something like this.

 

With reference to your letter dated xx/xx/xxxx enclosing documents.

 

The documents enclosed do not comply with the requirements of sections 77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974,

as they appear to be reconstituted documents, with information missing and containing erroneus information.

 

 

Some of the erroneus information included RBS account information related to a third party,

which is in breach of the Data Protection Act, which I am considering whether to bring to the attention of the Information Commissioners Office.

 

I await your reponse, including full compliance with the CCA request made and if you are only able to provide reconstituted documents, you should provide an explanation of this.

[aristilus]

If I were you, I would reply to Lowell saying that the documents sent do not appear to comply with the CCA request requirements, as they are a reconstituted copy, with documents missing or information included in error. Then say that Lowells have sent information related to a third parties RBS account, as part of the CCA request fulfilment.

 

 

So something like this.

 

With reference to your letter dated xx/xx/xxxx enclosing documents.

 

The documents enclosed do not comply with the requirements of sections 77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, as they appear to be reconstituted documents, with information missing and containing erroneus information. Some of the erroneus information included RBS account information related to a third party, which is in breach of the Data Protection Act, which I am considering whether to bring to the attention of the Information Commissioners Office.

 

I await your reponse, including full compliance with the CCA request made and if you are only able to provide reconstituted documents, you should provide an explanation of this.

 

................................................................................

reply sounds good to go will wait a little as they said 30 days, to reply? stretch it out a bit.....

just a quick quick Q? re: Statute/Barred: as my last payment was on the 09/01/2009 doesn't this make it S/B on the 09/012015 ?

Edited November 3, 2014 by aristilus

[unclebulgaria67]

................................................................................

reply sounds good to go will wait a little as the said 30 days, to reply? stretch it out a bit.....

just a quick quick Q? re: Statute/Barred: as my last payment was on the 09/01/2009 doesn't this make it S/B on the 09/012015 ?

 

If your last payment was Jan 09, the SB date may be later. It may be Feb 15 or March 15. The SB date runs from the date where you did not pay the last default notice issued.

 

I don't think it is wise to start digging about the SB date, as if you are unclear about it, then Lowells may not know either. If you start making enquiries, they might find out the correct date and if you are involved in correspondence with them, they might decide to issue a court claim if they can.

[aristilus]

Hey guys i just got to add this pn: its laughable:

i'll post them up in a mo'

my balance from 16/10/1999 £1073.53 nil in/nil out

 

to: 15/04/2000 £926.20 nil in/nil out credit limit was £2000 (which it never was anyway) it was £1700

 

then:16/05/2000 new balance:£910.73 nilin/nil out ? and my credit limit shot up to £4000

 

then:16/08/2000 new balance £889.93 nil in/nilout, so according to thier staemnets i had been paying ????

yet they confirm on the statements that nil ws ppaid in, and nil was paid out?

 

they must be using a mix of imperial/decimal/and double dutch mathematics??