Statutory demand from Lowell

[The Debt Star]

Re: Statutory demand from Lowell

yeah thats the one.

ps that's bob diamond's mug shot innit?

[ODC]

Re: Statutory demand from Lowell

Good Luck for tomorrow. Remember they arent called THE LEEDS LOSERS for nothing:beagle:

[ODC]

Re: Statutory demand from Lowell

No result yet ????

[lbmarcos]

Re: Statutory demand from Lowell

Hi all,

Just to confirm the outcome of my Court case last Thursday.

The Statutory Demand Lowell were seeking was dismissed by the Judge.

He looked at the only info that Lowells rep had with her which was 3 computer screenshots from Barclaycard which were barely illegible and had v.little info on them which the Lowell rep agreed with and from the start seemed embarassed as to what she and I had received.

The judge was not very impressed with what Lowells had sent and asked me if I had knowledge of the debt and if so was I disputing it. I advised that I was unaware of this debt as I thought I had paid off all my credit cards when we moved house some 6 years ago. The Judge took the view that there was a very high chance that the debt was Statute Barred and although he said that if Lowells did come up with additional info they could still issue me with bankruptcy proceedings he dismissed the Statutory Demand.

Good news but will have to see if Lowells come back with any further in the future or whether they just sell it on to someone else or give it back to Barclaycard.

Marcos

[ODC]

Re: Statutory demand from Lowell

Excellent News.. Now report their sorry asses.

They were winging it. They knew they had diddly squat and were hoping to intimidate you or hoping that you wouldnt appear and they would get judgement by default.

Now you know why they are known as THE LEEDS LOSERS

[Amy]

Re: Statutory demand from Lowell

Nice, well done x

[TUTTSI]

Re: Statutory demand from Lowell

Well done for standing your ground.

You don't always get good judges, but thank goodness you did and Lowell's were absolutely useless.

[Crispybacon]

Re: Statutory demand from Lowell

Just also wanted to add well done for standing your ground and attending the hearing.

What Lowells went to court with was a disgrace and they should have been held in contempt. As has already been said they were chancing it, hoping that you would be intimidated and not turn up to defend and get a default judgement which happens far too often.

I do wonder, if 100% of people actually attended their hearings to defend, what the % success rate would be compared to judgements given now if that is the scant evidence that is produced.

I only hope that their costs in foolishly pursuing this matter exceed the judgement they were seeking in the first place.

Best
Crispy

[CleverClogs]

Re: Statutory demand from Lowell

The judge was not very impressed with what Lowells had sent and asked me if I had knowledge of the debt and if so was I disputing it. I advised that I was unaware of this debt as I thought I had paid off all my credit cards when we moved house some 6 years ago. The Judge took the view that there was a very high chance that the debt was Statute Barred and although he said that if Lowells did come up with additional info they could still issue me with bankruptcy proceedings he dismissed the Statutory Demand.

Did he also award costs?

Good news but will have to see if Lowells come back with any further in the future or whether they just sell it on to someone else or give it back to Barclaycard.

They'll probably sell it to Statute Barred specialist such as those geniuses at MacKenzie Hall,

[CleverClogs]

Re: Statutory demand from Lowell

What Lowells went to court with was a disgrace and they should have been held in contempt. As has already been said they were chancing it, hoping that you would be intimidated and not turn up to defend and get a default judgement which happens far too often.

Exactly.

I do wonder, if 100% of people actually attended their hearings to defend, what the % success rate would be compared to judgements given now if that is the scant evidence that is produced.

I believe the OFT should be made aware of such antics, as issuing a Statutory Demand which has no realistic chance of success must surely contravene many (if not all) of their guidelines.

I only hope that their costs in foolishly pursuing this matter exceed the judgement they were seeking in the first place.

The fines the OFT could impose (but won't) would certainly exceed their costs.