I WON!!!! Served with a statuory demand by BW Legal/Lowell

[Celestine]

Re: HELP!!! I've just been served with a statuory demand by bwlegal/Lowell

Quite right, they shouldn't have issued a SD if they didn't have the documentation

[TUTTSI]

Re: HELP!!! I've just been served with a statuory demand by bwlegal/Lowell

I would say battle it out they have had - how many years to send you the required proofs and evidences.....they should not have issued a stat demand with no paperwork. I would get this thrown out and get costs for a wasted journey.

[pt2537]

Re: HELP!!! I've just been served with a statuory demand by bwlegal/Lowell

they have to prove the debt is immediatley due and payable per S268

IF they have no documents then they shouldnt have issued the SD as they cannot have a honsetly held believe the money is due immediatley

SOOOO

Tell em no

And refer the Judge to a case called Fitzroy Robinson v MEntmore towers on late adjournments

I wish i could get you a copy at the court but its para 9 of the above judgment you need

[Kafka]

Re: HELP!!! I've just been served with a statuory demand by bwlegal/Lowell

they have to prove the debt is immediatley due and payable per S268

IF they have no documents then they shouldnt have issued the SD as they cannot have a honsetly held believe the money is due immediatley

SOOOO

Tell em no

And refer the Judge to a case called Fitzroy Robinson v MEntmore towers on late adjournments

I wish i could get you a copy at the court but its para 9 of the above judgment you need

Thanks - I have texted this on in case the net connection is still weak.

[Kafka]

Re: HELP!!! I've just been served with a statuory demand by bwlegal/Lowell

Hearing over.

The judge didn't dismiss the SD and granted an adjournment, but would only allow them 21 days to supply the outstanding data. It doesn't sound bad news altogether from the way the judge handled it though and what each party has been asked to do. Lowell were not happy about some costs being awarded against them.

A full report will be posted later, but owing to commitments that may not be until later tonight.

[PlanB]

Re: HELP!!! I've just been served with a statuory demand by bwlegal/Lowell

Hearing over.

The judge didn't dismiss the SD and granted an adjournment, but would only allow them 21 days to supply the outstanding data.

Let's hope that the paperwork Lowells produce is rubbish so Fuzzy can dispute it and use Hammonds vs Pro fit to get the SD set aside. That's how PT got shot of mine last year :clap2:

I hate Lowells so much - they've got to be stopped from doing this. Can't the OFT take away their CCL or something

[Kafka]

Re: HELP!!! I've just been served with a statuory demand by bwlegal/Lowell

The feeling I get from the discussion is that the judge is assuming that they will probably throw in the towel now rather than fight it. They were made aware that they needed to deliver, so if they try to fight on without the proper paperwork they know they will get put through the mangle. This is only a debt of around 3k so they would have paid about £200 for it and they've already chased this, filed a claim, paid for hours of a barrister's time and landed £102 in costs today.

[ODC]

Re: HELP!!! I've just been served with a statuory demand by bwlegal/Lowell

Yet again the Leeds Loser's bluff has been called. They rely on people not contesting these things for a quick victory. Its scandalous that they can abuse the system in this way. A person risks losing house etc to satisfy the greed of these modern day shylocks. They should only be allowed to claim what they buy the debt for plus interest. They pay less than 10% and expect to make a huge profit out of peoples misfortune. They should use debt collection methods such as CCJs before being allowed to use this heavyhanded method.

[fuzzybrain]

Re: HELP!!! I've just been served with a statuory demand by bwlegal/Lowell

Update time (is there a chance this could moved into the VIP section so any inquistive eyes that are not forum friends cn't read thid - I think you know what i mean.....

Firstly a massive huge thank you so to Kafka for being such an amazing support today and being there for me on the phone, your advice and support was so incredible and it really helped knowing you were at then end of the phone.

Thank you also to you all who are helping me and offering such fabulous advice - please don't stop now as things are about to get interesting and I'm going to need all the help I can.


What happened

As you know solicitor for BW/Lowells wanted an adjournment for 28 days and then a further 28 days for my response and then a hearing day a month later. I refused point blank and so off to the judge we went to battle it out.


The Judge was seriously ticked off that BW/Lowells were "not in a position to defend the application to day due to lack of paperwork" (solictors phrasing) She asked why they had not contacted the court to ask for extra time and asked me if i had been contacted prior to today to ask for extra time. I stated that I had not been advised or asked about an adjournment, that it was only brought to my attention upon my arrival at court today.

She asked me why I thought the case should be dismissed so i put forward the following arguments:

Barclarycard has had since 2009 to comply with the CCA request and have failed to do so despite numerous requests from me since January 2009 onwards. I stated that it is my belief that the documentation does not exist as it would have been presented to me by BC when I first requested it

That the Stat demand was heavy handed and unneccesary and other options should have been explored before envoking insolvency procedures. I stated i felt the stat demand should be set aside and when the Lowells obtain the required documentation they can file for CCJ and we can go head to head in a more appropriate forum than heading straight for insolvency procedures.

That I suffer from a comination of rare and complex medication conditions and the stress of the stat demand and having to apply for it to be set aside was negatively affecting and impacting upon my health and that I wanted and needed this to be resolved as quickly as possible. The judge asked me if I had any proof, so i showed her my card advising that that I have a sacaral neuromodulation stimulator wired to nerves my spine that send signals to my brain and bladder. I also informed her that i take a slow release form of morphine twice a day and extra morphine when the pain is severe. i advised the judge that since being issued with the stat demand i have become very stressed because of it and had to increase the level and dosage of morphine that I take. The judg seemed to accept this, but I think it might be worth having a word with somebody in my medical team and see if they could do a letter confirming that stress is a trigger and can cause a flare in my condition that usually results the above mentioned way or me ending up in hospital.

The judge asked me if I was denying whether I owed the money. i stated that without seeing the requested CCA information then I couldn't answer that as i am questioning the enforceability of the debt and have been since 2009. The Judge then stated that i have rasied a lot of complex issues re CCA S78 in my witness statement and stated she was not aware of some of the points being raised. The judge then asked me if I had the rulings for the Harrison and Link that evidences the points raised in my witness statement. Sadly I hadn't even thought of bringing the rulings with me (i feel really dumb about that now, but I thought the other points would have had enough strength to get the stat demand dismissed)

The judge suggested that at the next hearing i bring the following rulings with me and am able to evidence the argument i am making.

The judge agreed that the stat demand is heavy handed espcially as they don't have the papwerwork to back it up. The solicitor claimed that they only knew about the set aside application on 7 Jan 2013 and therefore had not sufficent time to gather the required information. I then informed the judge that i have a letter sent by BW legal on 12 december stating they are now aware of the dispute and had stated in the letter they had requested the required info from Lowells who may need to go back to BC for the paperwork. Solicitor said that she had not been made aware of this letter, so i kindly offered to show her the letter - that didn't go down to well with the judge either!The judge stated that she was going to allow an adjournment but not the length or amount the solicitor was requesting. The judge gave the solicitor instructions that the required paperwork needed to be filed with the court within the next 21 days. She said then she would allow me another 21 days to file a response if i so wished to, but was not obiligated to and she gave us a return hearing date of 29 March. She then warned that she would not entertain any further requests for another adjournment at the next hearing.

The judge then advised me to evidence my argument and bring to court the rulings mentioned and be able to demonstrate the part of the ruling that supported the points raised in my WS - The judge specifically mentioned Harrison and Link and also Hammond.

Then the fun started the judge mentioned costs and at first the solicitor thought it was costs in their favour, but the judge was very quick to point out the Lowells have wasted both the court and my time by not having the required paperwork ready and that they should have notified the court and myself sooner and asked for an adjournment.

The judge asked me what costs i had experienced by attending today. i stated that i had to take the day off work and that i have occured travel expense of getting to the court. I also mentioned about the time I had spent researching stat demands and set aside applications and also photocoping.

The judge stated that the most she could allow was a witness fee of £90 per day and my travel expenses - which resulted in a costs awarded order against Lowell of £102. She said the other costs could be claimed at the next hearing (I'm trying not to read too much into that remark, but i can't help but think the judge is expected Lowells to fail to produce the required info - if they do then i'll stick a costs order in anyhow!!!)

The solicitor was really narked at this and stated to mention that I had ignored all Lowells letters and a cost order against Lowells/BW was unfair and unjust. the jugde squashed thiis one befire i time to speak out by saying they had started the ball rolling with issuing a stat demand and that i was obligated to defend such an action. They weren't ready and have wasted my time and the court's time today so it was only fair i was recompensated for these costs occured.

I then addressed the judge and voiced my concerns that the required and requested paperworkdid not exist as BC would have sent it to me in 2009 when i was repeatedly requesting the information. I stated that if Lowells now have ownership of the debt so wouldn't all the paperwork have been given to them then and ths if they hadn't got it then it didn't exist!! The judge stated that I have a very vaild point and would able to argue this at the next hearing if we were in the same position as today.

Solicitor then piped uo with hiw unfair a costs order was but te judge was really getting ticked off at this point and told the solicitor to inform Lowells that they had ti pay the cost order to me by 15 February and they need to file the required info by the 21 February.

The judge then indicated that the hearing was now adjourned and for both parties to follow the courts instructions given.

I spoke with the solicitor afterwards and said that neother of us got what we wanted and how much longer were BW/Lowells going to drag out this out for as the paperwork doesn't exisit as if it did it would have been produced by now. I asked why didn't they just withdrawn the applciatioon and go down a CCJ route, which was far more and appropriate course of action. I warned the solicitor that if BW/Lowells intend to keep pushing further forwards with this stat demand then i would go for their throats and i would hit lowells for every single penny i possibly could and that the judge seemed sympathic ti my cause and very obliging to award costs in my favour. Solicitor repied that she was a rented solicitior and that the decision lies with Lowell/BW and i should speak with Lowells/BW about getting a conclusion sorted. I declined and said I'll wait to see what happens next and keep logging the hours and every expense down no matter how small.

So that's pretty much it. Costs were a big bonus and i think its sent a warning sign to Lowells that this is going to cost them if they want to keep going. Personally i think they will enter a withdrawal of stat demand at te last possible moment but they will make me sweat first.

Ok - i'm open to all suggestions/advice/support and sharing of knowledge and experience

[Kafka]

Re: HELP!!! I've just been served with a statuory demand by bwlegal/Lowell

That's a great summary, thanks,

Please can Admin move this to VIP straight away?

[Celestine]

Re: HELP!!! I've just been served with a statuory demand by bwlegal/Lowell

Moved to VIP xxx

Well done Fuzzy AND Kafka for yesterday. I'm glad to read the Judge was supportive and awarded costs against Lowells. Although, technically speaking she could have gone a lot further and indeed should have set aside the Stat Demand given the clear abuse of process that has gone on here. It's concerning to hear her quizzing you as to whether you 'owe' the money, because that is not technically relevant to the issues in front of her. Your responses to this were very good btw.

But as you say, she was clearly unfamiliar with relevant case law. I've encountered a more senior Judge recently who didn't even know the legal difference between bank charges and credit card charges! *sigh*

Sooo, if Lowell don't provide paperwork within 21 days to the court, the SD will be set aside?

[TUTTSI]

Re: HELP!!! I've just been served with a statuory demand by bwlegal/Lowell

Well done Fuzzy for standing your ground and with the fantastic help from PT and Kaftka. Lets hope that Mojake (another member having a battle with Lovells as well) will also have some success on his Lovell SD set aside.

[labman]

Re: HELP!!! I've just been served with a statuory demand by bwlegal/Lowell

This is normal and should usually be resisted. Why the court even allows it is beyond me - they are condoning the DCA taking advantage of vulnerable people by providing them with a private room for these discussions. It is dispicable IMO.

[fuzzybrain]

Re: HELP!!! I've just been served with a statuory demand by bwlegal/Lowell

Moved to VIP xxx
Thank you so much for doing this – Kafka told me yesterday how Lowell like to spy and thought it was best to keep this out of their grasp


Well done Fuzzy AND Kafka for yesterday.
I couldn’t have coped yesterday without Kafka’s help, he was an angel and I feel very grateful for his help. I was somebody he didn’t know and yet Kafka was so generous with his time, knowledge and support, I feel truly humbled and hope one day I am able to repay the huge favour.

I would also like to thank all at LB’s for their amazing support, knowledge and assistance. If it wasn’t for you all I would probably have lost my set aside application and looking at being made bankrupt. There are not enough words to express my sincere and deep gratitude. As soon as I get the costs money from Lowells I will make a donation to the site.

If there were more people like Kafka’s and many of the LB member’s generous and supportive nature in this world then we would all live in a much nicer world


I'm glad to read the Judge was supportive and awarded costs against Lowells. Although, technically speaking she could have gone a lot further and indeed should have set aside the Stat Demand given the clear abuse of process that has gone on here. It's concerning to hear her quizzing you as to whether you 'owe' the money, because that is not technically relevant to the issues in front of her. Your responses to this were very good btw.
Again I have LB’s to thank for this as I remember reading on a thread about how to answer this question. The issue isn’t about the existence of the debt but about Lowell’s ability to enforce the debt and whether it is enforceable. Without having the actual agreement I signed nobody knows if the agreement is enforceable. I was concerned that the judge was going to go against me and go down of the route of you had the card and the debt is yours so tough luck and pay up, but my answer seemed to stop her going down this track – perhaps she was testing me to see if I actually understood the enforceability issue and showing that I did stopped her


But as you say, she was clearly unfamiliar with relevant case law. I've encountered a more senior Judge recently who didn't even know the legal difference between bank charges and credit card charges! *sigh*
My greatest concern is that Lowell will now be after my blood as I have cost them money. My gut feeling is that they will do one of three things:

They will either roll over at the last minute and withdraw (and if they do then I will ask the court to award costs in my favour)

They will contact me and offer to withdraw the stat demand if I agree to let the matter drop and not request the court to make a cost order against them. I will only agree to this if they put in writing that they will not be perusing the debt any further and will write the debt off

They create a blue peter version of the credit agreement (which will be on the level of harry potter fiction as if this credit agreement actually existed then it would have made an appearance by now). If this happens then I will need all the help I can get as this will need to be picked apart piece by piece and I will need to be able to defend each point raised in my sleep as well being able to answer any possible question the solicitor or judge could ever think about asking in regard to the submitted paperwork. I’m up for the fight, but I am going to need a lot of help with the knowledge side and relevant rulings and case law demonstrating my argument.

Sooo, if Lowell don't provide paperwork within 21 days to the court, the SD will be set aside
I’m not sure, I was about to ask the judge when the solicitor started to whine about the cost order again and I lost my train of thought and only remembered about asking that question after we left the room. I will check with the court on the next working day after Lowells filing date and if they haven’t responded in time then I want to get a non compliance defence in asap and ask the judge to dismiss the stat demand and I will also ask for costs.

I will claim that Lowells should never have made a stat demand when they failed to have all required documentation to make such an application and by doing so the issuing of a stat demand was vexatious and abuse of power and that they have failed to follow the OFT debt collection guidelines.

[fuzzybrain]

Re: HELP!!! I've just been served with a statuory demand by bwlegal/Lowell

I think my brain is on vacation. I've just realised the date we have to court is Good Friday - what I should do?