Lowells/O2

[charitynjw]

Preliminary stuff.

Court claim via MCOL.
Acknowledged & defended mainly on non disclosure of requested documents.
CCA request & CPR 31.14 sent prior to defence.
Lowells have twice refused to disclose any Deed of Assignment & of course say that mobile 'phone agreements are not CCA regulated. (Not completely true!)
Directions Questionnaires have been swapped.
Mediation Service have contacted us......they can't deal with it due to non disclosure of documents, so now awaiting court directions re allocation, etc.

A SAR to Telefonica has been replied to.....they have very little info due to the age of the cause of action.
Problem is, neither do we.

As far as we can recall, back in the day my OH had 2 O2 accounts but were for 2 of the children.
My OH was looking to 'cap' the calls, as they were getting difficult to pay.
We were talked into new contracts for both (for Blackberrys....all the rage back then).
Previous to the 'new' contracts my OH had been with O2 for about 3.5 years, so I guess there was no ongoing contract at that point....just payment of airtime used per month.
After 2 months into the 'new' contracts it became obvious that it was having no affect in reducing the monthly bills. If anything it was more expensive, as I believe Blackberries needed a chargeable 'bolt-on' app to work properly.
So OH complained (unfortunately via the call centre, so no proof).
Eventually (after 2 months) they were both cancelled & OH went with another provider which did 'cap' the monthly amount.

The strange bit is that on one of the accounts (the one not being chased), there is no early termination or 'rest of the contract' fee shown.
But of course, the one being chased does show the fee.

I'm thinking that OH may have been misled into arranging for the 'new' agreements....poss to help with sales targets?

Any insights into the back-story of this would be appreciated.
[MENTION=99495]slainte caragh[/MENTION]?

[slainte caragh]

Re: Lowells/O2

Preliminary stuff.

Court claim via MCOL.
Acknowledged & defended mainly on non disclosure of requested documents.
CCA request & CPR 31.14 sent prior to defence.
Lowells have twice refused to disclose any Deed of Assignment & of course say that mobile 'phone agreements are not CCA regulated. (Not completely true!)
Directions Questionnaires have been swapped.
Mediation Service have contacted us......they can't deal with it due to non disclosure of documents, so now awaiting court directions re allocation, etc.

A SAR to Telefonica has been replied to.....they have very little info due to the age of the cause of action.
Problem is, neither do we.

As far as we can recall, back in the day my OH had 2 O2 accounts but were for 2 of the children.
My OH was looking to 'cap' the calls, as they were getting difficult to pay.02 have never been able to cap contracts, just the data bundle. if this was how the contract was sold and you can prove it you have them for misselling.
We were talked into new contracts for both (for Blackberrys....all the rage back then). ..when you say "back n the day"- When exactly was this? what kind of contract was it? Standard handset or Refresh?
Previous to the 'new' contracts my OH had been with O2 for about 3.5 years, so I guess there was no ongoing contract at that point....just payment of airtime used per month. Did your OH updgrade the phones at any time? If so he/she was in contract.
After 2 months into the 'new' contracts it became obvious that it was having no affect in reducing the monthly bills. If anything it was more expensive, as I believe Blackberries needed a chargeable 'bolt-on' app to work properly.This depends on when. If you needed a chargable BB bolt-on this debt is possibly SB, as far as I am aware BB data has been free for at least 5 years.
So OH complained (unfortunately via the call centre, so no proof) How long ago was the complaint made? Written complaints are kept for 5 years, recordings of conversations are only kept for 6-8 months. Every advisor that accesses an account leaves a "footprint" and is required by law to make a note, even if it was "complaint- contract too high". If the contracts have been terminated for longer than 24 months they might not have access to the records.
Eventually (after 2 months) they were both cancelled & OH went with another provider which did 'cap' the monthly amount If you do not cancel the contracts within 14 days of receipt of the phone (and return said devices), you are in contract and termination fees would be applied. This is only not the case if it is agreed with o2 . They then send out a letter confirming this is the case and this is normally only done by High Level Complaints.

The strange bit is that on one of the accounts (the one not being chased), there is no early termination or 'rest of the contract' fee shown.
But of course, the one being chased does show the fee. Unusual, to be honest I think you got lucky.

I'm thinking that OH may have been misled into arranging for the 'new' agreements....poss to help with sales targets? It is a possibility I'll grant you but having knowledge of them I know that the emphasis on providing a "standard" contract was always handset costs. Blackberries were expensive phones so agents didn't like selling them, did more harm for their sales targets than good. When a contract is set up the T&Cs and the "add ons" are sent out as a matter of course. This is something that no advisor, no matter how sales hungry, can avoid! When you order a handset you literally cannot proceed with the order unless the relevant paperwork is added! The order also fails if you try to add the wrong paperwork.

Any insights into the back-story of this would be appreciated.
@slainte caragh?

Looks like the op got lucky with one set of term fees, which would be liable if they waited 2 months for disconnection.
If you can get some dates for me I can see what I can discover but with Blackberries being all the rage this might be SB (we can but hope.)

My answers, as always are in blue Chas

Callie

[charitynjw]

Re: Lowells/O2

Ok, I'll dig out the relevant dates & will post details later today.

Cheers, Callie!

[slainte caragh]

Re: Lowells/O2

Any time

[suffering]

Re: Lowells/O2

Can someone explain the position of Lowell because as i see it they are a third party interloper that due to data protection do not have the relevant documentation to pursue a claim if challenged. They buy old accounts and hope to make a bob or too from people that do not challenge them. Surly the first thing they have to produce is a contract followed by a personal account between the supplier and the customer. Something stinks but i'm not sure i am clued up enough to suss it

[charitynjw]

Re: Lowells/O2

Can someone explain the position of Lowell because as i see it they are a third party interloper that due to data protection do not have the relevant documentation to pursue a claim if challenged. They buy old accounts and hope to make a bob or too from people that do not challenge them. Surly the first thing they have to produce is a contract followed by a personal account between the supplier and the customer. Something stinks but i'm not sure i am clued up enough to suss it

Debt purchase firms such as this one usually buy portfolios of non-performing debts via a legal process known as assignment.
This is normally pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925.
s136 of that Act requires notification to the debtor 'under the hand of' the assignor in order for the assignment to become 'legal' (eg the assignee can then enforce the alleged debt in their own right, without the need to join the original creditor into any litigation).
There is often a standard clause in commercial contracts whereby the creditor can assign it.
Although production of the original contract is preferable, all that is required in many cases is proof that an agreement existed. This can be evidenced by documentation & records which are separate from (but relating to) the actual agreement.
Consumer Credit agreements pre April 2007 may be dealt with differently due to the wording of (& the changes to) the Consumer Credit Act.

[charitynjw]

Re: Lowells/O2

A Notice of Discontinuance hit the 'welcome' mat today'

There will be turkey for Xmas!