• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Statutory Demand - Lowell Portfolio

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Statutory Demand - Lowell Portfolio

    I wondered if you could give me a little advice, I have today received a visit from BW Legal regarding a Statutory Demand from Lowell Portfolio I.

    My husband answered the door and the man would not give the letter over to him so I am yet to receive the Statutory Demand in person as the man said he would return with it.

    When my husband told me what had happened, I telephoned BW Legal to request information regarding the visit, I must admit they were very helpful and told me it was for a debt from Freemans PLC passed to Lowell Portfolio I, who instructed BW Legal to serve me with a Statutory Demand for the sum of £6197.51.

    This debt, I recall dates back to 2010 / 2011 and has only recently come back to light, the majority of the debt even though in my name, was made through my husband who is diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder and Bipolar, his spending is erratic at the best of times. I am currently unemployed and live off my husband's wage, we struggle at best to live on the money we have.

    Could you please offer any advice as to the first port of call with this issue?

    Many thanks in advance
    Tags: None

  • #2
    Re: Statutory Demand - Lowell Portfolio

    Originally posted by WHITE COLLAR View Post
    Could you please offer any advice as to the first port of call with this issue?
    Your first port of call was to come here!

    One of the site owners rather likes dealing with Statutory Demands from Bowells, as they lose and end up paying her.

    The first action to take is to make a request under s78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (link) from Bowells, enclosing a £1 postal order for the statutory fee. Although the account was probably opened on-line and the only "signature" would have been a box to tick, the chances are reasonable that Freemans won't be able to cobble together a reconstituted "twue copy" that will stand up to scrutiny. It is almost certain that Bowells won't have even that - the daft turds never do!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Statutory Demand - Lowell Portfolio

      Thanks for the reply. As predicted, BW Legal have today visited to deliver the Statutory Demand which I have now accepted from him. I am concerned as the date on the letter is actually 16 December 2013 and it appears that this is the date they are using for the Statutory Demand. This obviously is outside of the 18 day period and by Monday when I get to speak to somebody it will be outside of the 22 days. I'm really confused as to my next step as it doesn't leave me any time to get the information I require or even to dispute the Statutory Demand.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Statutory Demand - Lowell Portfolio

        Yes, this is what Bowells do - they habitually pre-date their Statutory Demands to deceive the recipients into supposing that they can no longer get it set aside.

        As a layman, I do wonder if a case could be made against Bowells for attempting to pervert the course of justice.

        The SD can be set aside, though, as the period starts from the date it was served and not the date that Bowells put on it.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Statutory Demand - Lowell Portfolio

          Thank you, I am now going to send a S.78 CCA 1974 Act request to Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd to send me the relevant info, so I will keep you updated.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Statutory Demand - Lowell Portfolio

            Originally posted by CleverClogs View Post
            Your first port of call was to come here!

            One of the site owners rather likes dealing with Statutory Demands from Bowells, as they lose and end up paying her.

            The first action to take is to make a request under s78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (link) from Bowells, enclosing a £1 postal order for the statutory fee. Although the account was probably opened on-line and the only "signature" would have been a box to tick, the chances are reasonable that Freemans won't be able to cobble together a reconstituted "twue copy" that will stand up to scrutiny. It is almost certain that Bowells won't have even that - the daft turds never do!
            HAHA my record isnt too bad dealing with Lowells either ya know lol.

            Cels away at the moment, but id happily take a look at this if you wanted.
            I work for Roach Pittis Solicitors. I give my free time available to helping other on the forum and would be happy to try and assist informally where needed. Any posts I make on LegalBeagles are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as legal advice. Any advice I provide is without liability.

            If you need to contact me please email me on Pt@roachpittis.co.uk .

            I have been involved in leading consumer credit and data protection cases including Harrison v Link Financial Limited (High Court), Grace v Blackhorse (Court of Appeal) and also Kotecha v Phoenix Recoveries (Court of Appeal) along with a number of other reported cases and often blog about all things consumer law orientated.

            You can also follow my blog on consumer credit here.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Statutory Demand - Lowell Portfolio

              Originally posted by pt2537 View Post
              HAHA my record isnt too bad dealing with Lowells either ya know lol.
              Yes, but you're less winsome. :grin:

              Cels away at the moment, but id happily take a look at this if you wanted.
              I'm sure they'd be delighted.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Statutory Demand - Lowell Portfolio

                Originally posted by pt2537 View Post
                HAHA my record isnt too bad dealing with Lowells either ya know lol.

                Cels away at the moment, but id happily take a look at this if you wanted.
                Hi, if you wouldn't mind taking a look for me, that would be great. What do you need from me?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Statutory Demand - Lowell Portfolio

                  Originally posted by WHITE COLLAR View Post
                  Hi, if you wouldn't mind taking a look for me, that would be great. What do you need from me?
                  All in hand
                  I work for Roach Pittis Solicitors. I give my free time available to helping other on the forum and would be happy to try and assist informally where needed. Any posts I make on LegalBeagles are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as legal advice. Any advice I provide is without liability.

                  If you need to contact me please email me on Pt@roachpittis.co.uk .

                  I have been involved in leading consumer credit and data protection cases including Harrison v Link Financial Limited (High Court), Grace v Blackhorse (Court of Appeal) and also Kotecha v Phoenix Recoveries (Court of Appeal) along with a number of other reported cases and often blog about all things consumer law orientated.

                  You can also follow my blog on consumer credit here.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Statutory Demand - Lowell Portfolio

                    Any chance of getting those turds done for repeatedly pre-dating SDs?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Statutory Demand - Lowell Portfolio

                      Originally posted by CleverClogs View Post
                      Any chance of getting those turds done for repeatedly pre-dating SDs?
                      i shall have a chat with my contact at the OFT enforcement team.
                      I work for Roach Pittis Solicitors. I give my free time available to helping other on the forum and would be happy to try and assist informally where needed. Any posts I make on LegalBeagles are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as legal advice. Any advice I provide is without liability.

                      If you need to contact me please email me on Pt@roachpittis.co.uk .

                      I have been involved in leading consumer credit and data protection cases including Harrison v Link Financial Limited (High Court), Grace v Blackhorse (Court of Appeal) and also Kotecha v Phoenix Recoveries (Court of Appeal) along with a number of other reported cases and often blog about all things consumer law orientated.

                      You can also follow my blog on consumer credit here.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Statutory Demand - Lowell Portfolio

                        Is there any update on this case PT? :tinysmile_twink_t2:
                        "Although scalar fields are Lorentz scalars, they may transform nontrivially under other symmetries, such as flavour or isospin. For example, the pion is invariant under the restricted Lorentz group, but is an isospin triplet (meaning it transforms like a three component vector under the SU(2) isospin symmetry). Furthermore, it picks up a negative phase under parity inversion, so it transforms nontrivially under the full Lorentz group; such particles are called pseudoscalar rather than scalar. Most mesons are pseudoscalar particles." (finally explained to a captivated Celestine by Professor Brian Cox on Wednesday 27th June 2012 )

                        I am proud to have co-founded LegalBeagles in 2007

                        If we have helped you we'd appreciate it if you can leave a review on our Trust Pilot page

                        If you wish to book an appointment with me to discuss your credit agreement, please email kate@legalbeaglesgroup. com

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Statutory Demand - Lowell Portfolio

                          Originally posted by Celestine View Post
                          Is there any update on this case PT? :tinysmile_twink_t2:
                          whoops my bad, yes, the demand disappeared and the lowell cheque book was opened
                          I work for Roach Pittis Solicitors. I give my free time available to helping other on the forum and would be happy to try and assist informally where needed. Any posts I make on LegalBeagles are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as legal advice. Any advice I provide is without liability.

                          If you need to contact me please email me on Pt@roachpittis.co.uk .

                          I have been involved in leading consumer credit and data protection cases including Harrison v Link Financial Limited (High Court), Grace v Blackhorse (Court of Appeal) and also Kotecha v Phoenix Recoveries (Court of Appeal) along with a number of other reported cases and often blog about all things consumer law orientated.

                          You can also follow my blog on consumer credit here.

                          Comment

                          View our Terms and Conditions

                          LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

                          If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


                          If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
                          Working...
                          X