**CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

[beaconsman]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

apologies for the typos, was a bit happy!

So, in this case, I feel I have just cause in going after VAnquis and getting the charges back. They sent me a letter back in october stating they wouldn't let me have them back..

I disagree.

[beaconsman]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

Hi all, sorry I have been away, been poorly. Just to clarify if I should ask Lowlifes why they are still going to enter on my credit file if the account is closed.

[R0b]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

Whilst we believe the account due endowing, to bring this matter to a swift and amicable resolution, without any admission od liability or wrongdoing, I have taken the decision to close the account. This means we will no longer be pursuing the outstanding balances. However we will continue to report the default to the CRA's. I want to challenge this also, as ion they also closed the account, why are they allowed to still default the account? Any advice would be appreciated on this point...

I would argue that closing of the account and discontinuing and closing the without admission of liability or wrongdoing is a sign that they have written off any charges i.e. it is reported as settled and 0 outstanding balance, they should not be reporting a default on your account? therefore the information they are reporting is not factually correct.

Maybe the more knowledgeable on this could answer that question.

[nemesis45]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

I would argue that closing of the account and discontinuing and closing the without admission of liability or wrongdoing is a sign that they have written off any charges i.e. it is reported as settled and 0 outstanding balance, they should not be reporting a default on your account? therefore the information they are reporting is not factually correct.

Maybe the more knowledgeable on this could answer that question.

The default was placed by the original creditor not Lowell, the default happened nothing can change that unless Vanquis
are willing to remove it. Otherwise it remains for 6 years from the default date.
An appeal to Vanquis for removal may be a way forward.

nem

[R0b]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

Sure, but the agreement was assigned to Lowell? therefore Vanquis have no rights in the agreement anymore and can no longer keep the default notice on there? wasn't there threads about original creditor removing the default and the assignee would have to place the default on file - isnt this the same thing? If they have no vested interest in the matter then surely they cannot keep the default notice on file, it would have to be Lowell?

Or am i Missing something here?

[MIKE770]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

It would be replace as a Lowell heading from Vanquis name = the rest stays the same

[nemesis45]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

Sure, but the agreement was assigned to Lowell? therefore Vanquis have no rights in the agreement anymore and can no longer keep the default notice on there? wasn't there threads about original creditor removing the default and the assignee would have to place the default on file - isnt this the same thing? If they have no vested interest in the matter then surely they cannot keep the default notice on file, it would have to be Lowell?

Or am i Missing something here?

See many of the replies regarding the situation where people
have asked for defaults to be removed debt purchasers refer
to the original creditor recording the default and the debtor
must take it up with the OC.

The case regarding defaults was in relation to agrements which are irredeemably unenforceable.

nem

[R0b]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

Yep i understand, but taking it back to basic contract levels here. Once someone assigns the rights to something be it a contract or something tangible, they then cannot assert rights anymore. you would therefore expect the same principle to apply in the case of defaults. If the OC has given their rights away to another party in return for a small fee, then my point being is that surely they cannot continue to mark the debtor as in default as they are not privy to the contract anymore and are now a third party.

So what I am trying to get at is, the OC cant claim a default on the credit report as they have no rights. Even if Lowell put a default on the credit file the argument is that they have closed the account and no further action being taken therefore they cannot keep it in default as the account is closed and should be marked as settled - If the account was still open then sure the default could continue but the wording of the letter suggests to me that the default should be removed.

[beaconsman]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

Thanks Rob, that was my way of understanding the contractual agreements also. As stated, if the OC (vanquis) sold this to Lowlifes, then they (vanquis) surely waive all rights and control of said account to Lowlifes..

Lowlifes have closed the account so why can they still enter it as default?

I am also chasing vanquish for the charges to be repaid even though they have said no in the first instance, I have had advice and been told to push vanquis in a nice letter.

[MIKE770]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

The default is a true account of the situation, has no effect closing the account = it is a record (has to be a true Record) of the situation and stays for 6 years at DCR, only way it could be got rid of is IF!!! it was not a true statement i.e. not your original account/purchases.

[nemesis45]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

The default is a true account of the situation, has no effect closing the account = it is a record (has to be a true Record) of the situation and stays for 6 years at DCR, only way it could be got rid of is IF!!! it was not a true statement i.e. not your original account/purchases.

Correct Mike, the true picture of the account is that the Original Creditor placed and reported it to the CRA's therefore it remains on file for the full 6 years.
One was before the ICO changed its view on how defaults are placed and report " negotiate " removal" of a late placed or satisfied defaulted account it is virtually impossible now to remove an " unexpired " default entry it has nothing to do with " contractual rights" , closed accounts, those accounts which were the subject of a failed CC Claim.
The debt was defaulted the entry remains for 6 years from the actual default date posted by the OC.

All a debt purchaser con do is update credit files i.e. it's name and address when it purchased the debt, the and the date the file was updated, a debt purchaser cannot change the original default date, add a " new" default as some DP's have tried by changing the date to the date of purchase.

In reality the only ways of having a default removed " early" are 1. The default was wrongly placed e.g. along time after the cause of action. 2. If the default sum
(not the default balance) was made up solely of charges without which (charges) the account would not have been defaulted.

Rob I'm afraid your theory is flawed, there is no "mileage" in it, it' been argued before.

nem

[beaconsman]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

Actually, the reason the account went into default in the first place was the horrific charges Vanquish whacked on. My purchases were all paid for on time. I am now in the process of dealign with vanquish and getting all ROP charges back plus the late payment fees..even though they are the £12 charges..worth harassing them as I have been harassed for a year.

[beaconsman]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

Again, successfully argued.



The account has been closed

Completed Successfully

---

Your dispute has been successfully resolved and we're making arrangements for your credit report to be amended in accordance with your request. You should be able to see the changes on your Noddle credit report when your next monthly update takes place. You can log-in to your account to see when your report is next due to be updated. Please remember if your report is due to be updated within the next week, this change may not show until the following update. Please be reassured that anyone searching your report will see the most up-to-date data.
Raised on
17/02/2016

Account number



Account type

[nemesis45]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

Again, successfully argued.



The account has been closed

Completed Successfully

---

Your dispute has been successfully resolved and we're making arrangements for your credit report to be amended in accordance with your request. You should be able to see the changes on your Noddle credit report when your next monthly update takes place. You can log-in to your account to see when your report is next due to be updated. Please remember if your report is due to be updated within the next week, this change may not show until the following update. Please be reassured that anyone searching your report will see the most up-to-date data.
Raised on
17/02/2016

Account number



Account type

Great new beaconsman, well done!!

nem

[charitynjw]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

The default is a true account of the situation, has no effect closing the account = it is a record (has to be a true Record) of the situation and stays for 6 years at DCR, only way it could be got rid of is IF!!! it was not a true statement i.e. not your original account/purchases.

IMHO

As the claimant did not (I suspect could not) fully comply with the CCA request, the alleged debt is unenforceable. If unenforceable, then does not Grace & Anor v Black Horse kick in?
It's unenforceable until the claimant complies, which may be never.