3 MOBILE

[Roy Clayton]

Hi
Has anyone out there got a copy of the terms and conditions for 3 mobile accounts as at May 2006 or before. I need them for an up and coming courts case. 3 mobile and Lowell wont comply with Civil Procedural Rules or the Data Protection Act amd Ofcom say it will cost too much to locate and they are potless. There is a website that does archived terms if anyone can help.
Cheers

[labman]

Re: 3 MOBILE

Any use?

http://www.ictdec.org/en/regions/reg...35/en/235.html

[Roy Clayton]

Re: 3 MOBILE

Appreciated Labman but have already used this in the first round and found the judge surprisingly disinterested. It is still the basis on why section 136 of the LOP should not apply. Terms unfair and not enforceable, no debt equalls no absolute assignment.

[labman]

Re: 3 MOBILE

Can you post a link to something that says that particular set of T&C's were deemed unenforceable,as I have not been able to find one. I have also been a customer of 3 for 10 or so years, so have an active interest in this.

Would it be a real pain to provide a potted history of the exact issues here ina timeline so we can see what has / has not been done and where exactly you stand now?

[Roy Clayton]

Re: 3 MOBILE

Labman

Happy to do a potted history later in the week, but time is running out and I have to get my papers to the Appeal Court ASAP in the next few days.

My main aim is to get Lowell's Judgement set asside on the basis of the procedural error by the Judge, in hearing Lowell's case. The purpose of the last hearing was to hear my counterclaim for harrassment. Lowell had not paid their hearing fee or made their disclosure. There case had been removed from the listings two days earlier. The Judge still heard their case instead of mine. I also hope that Lowell's conduct their failure to disclose information and failure to adhere to the Judge's Directions, will be persusive. They have missed 6 deadlines imposed by the court.

A Senior District Judge looked at my file after I complained about the unequal treatment I encountered and my complain was upheld. They refunded me some fees and waived the appeal fee.

The main issues are that the OC acted unfairly in unilaterally changeing the terms and conditions and I had a right to cancel when they exploited their superior bargaining power by efusing to return bill as per agreement. The UTCCR 1999 says that unfair terms are not binding. So no agreement would mean no absolute assignment.

Ofcom has also agreed that the specific set of terms relating to my agreement were unfair so that adds weight. 100 plus complaints to BBC Watchdog about 3G selling the portfolio to Lowell also add weight. I also have a letter from 3 Executive Office saying that they run a paperless office so cant comply with my DPA request, also 3 lied to me. They said they could not sent me a copy of the NOA because it is computer generated. It later transpired from the CSA that Lowell send the letters so 3G could never have produced it. I guess you were one of the lucky ones with 3. I have been with o2 for the last six years no probs with them.

Lowell can not prove they sent an NOA in line with Section 196(4)

They have stated two dates the account was defaulted
They have stated three dates the NOA was allegedly sent
They have stated three dates the portfolio was transferred

They will not produce the deeds of assignment
They will not produce terms and conditions relating to May 2006
They agree no default notice was sent.
Cheers
Roy

They have

[labman]

Re: 3 MOBILE

The deeds of assignment can be forced to be revealed using one of the CPR's.

[Roy Clayton]

Re: 3 MOBILE

Laman

I tried quoted Lord Denning Judge Pelias v Van Lyynn case for disclosing Deeds. Judge ordered disclosure 25 July 2012 they ignored him. I reminded the courts Lowell were in contempt for non-compliance but the Judge was on holiday. Stuck in a DPA and paid a tenner for same info. Lowell replied 42 days later and only gave up part info. They deleted all info for the period where the the alleged NOA was issued and where the account was purchased and where the default may have been issued. Judge back from hols and told Lowell give it up by 28 September 2012. No compliance. On 2 October 2012 (4 days late) they gave me three pages of deeds. Signature page with no date of transaction, contents page and a page with a single line of information about date contract started and date defaulted.

Sanctions state that any documents not disclosed are debarred.

Is this good though? Lowell can not produce deeds, but I wanted them because they say the account was purchased 12 September 2008 in their original claim and purchased 25 September 2008 in their defence to counterclaim and 3g say they sold the account 17 October 2008. Is the claim incorrectly stated???

The deeds would reveal all.

Lowell know how to run rings around Judges and CPR.