Lowell and 3 mobile

[Southerner]

Re: Lowell and 3 mobile

Has anyone else had problems with 3 terminating a contract (without your knowledge) and then being chased by Lowell for an early termination charge ?

If so, what happened ?

[Roy Clayton]

Re: Lowell and 3 mobile

Yes, no demands for payment, no default notice and no notice of assignment. What they will do is stop you from getting your information under DPA and CPR by hook or by crook. Three will say they run a paperless office so cant supply the info. Lowell will delete anything compromising on your account when they finally have to divy up the info. You will be given copies of letters that claim to be the NOA if you start kicking up a stink. They will look prety amateurish and may even be addressed incorrectly. See my posts on Lowell and Court cases. Its funny when 3 mobile had to reply to OTELO they found paper in their paperless office in the form of letters I had never seen. I asked 3 for a copy of the pre-debt sale letter and they wrote to me saying that they could not reproduce them as they were computer generated. Lowell later confirmed 3 dont send them Lowell does. I asked 3 Executive Office to explain why they had not been honest in the first place, but they wont communicate with me.

[bluebottle]

Re: Lowell and 3 mobile

Probably gulping down vast doses of Imodium Plus. Being caught out like that does tend to cause a Colorectal Catastrophe. :rockon:

[Roy Clayton]

Re: Lowell and 3 mobile

Hi Southener

Here is your answer. It all ended badly for Lowell in this one. Even the first Judge agreed that the Early Termination Fee was not appropriate. Check out Ofcoms report on this. See Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 Sections 5,6,7 and 8(1) and the Unfair Trading Regulations regarding distortion of consumer activity. Section 5. OFT v Ashbourne argueably applies. Lowell's defence is that the ETF is a subsidy of the handset. Did you see that bit clearly in your agreement? Clear intelligible or not? If 3 contract is prior to 2006 then check out the Ofcom ruling that 3 terms were potentially unfair CW000888/01/06. Check out 3s records and ask before they sold it did they issue a demand for payment or a SDN?
Good luck

[Southerner]

Re: Lowell and 3 mobile

I've now had a letter from Hamptons stating they could pursue a ccj if payment is not received within 10 days. I've not seen a signed copy of my contract, so should I request this before any payment is even considered ?

The copies of the outstanding bills that they sent me (looked like they were on photocopied 3 paper) had an address on that I have never lived at, therefore never received these bills. That is my argument for why the early termination charge is invalid.

How should I respond to hamptons ?

[Hurricane Puffrose]

Re: Lowell and 3 mobile

I suggest a SAR which I will happily translate for you.

You need to send it to 3 Mobile, with a reminder they have a legal obligation to respond within 40days, and also a complaint to their CEO about this, 3 are good at sending out "term charges".

[Southerner]

Re: Lowell and 3 mobile

Sorry, I'm being thick, what's a SAR ?

[Hurricane Puffrose]

Re: Lowell and 3 mobile

your not thick

A SAR is a request you make to a company for all the information they hold on you, it costs £10 and they cannot (CANNOT) refuse.

i am an ex employee of o2 and have read countless accounts notes, so would be glad to decipher the jargon for you. PLEASE NOTE they cannot put anything derogatory/rude about you.
they can say Southerner was unhappy. Southerner was irate etc but cannot put Southerner was in a crappy mood and was a complete numpty on the phone!


http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...otes-explained

[Roy Clayton]

Re: Lowell and 3 mobile

Lowell (Hampton are the same) will argue that putting a sim card in the phone is accepting the contract. They will say the bills and the agreement are sufficient to prove the debt is yours. They will say that the ETF is a subsidy of the phone and not a penalty charge. Penalty charges are definately unfair. Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999. However, is it clear in your agreement that the ETF is clearly shown as a subsidy. Contracts must be in clear intelligible language. You will struggle to get your agreement, but I would go with the Section 7 DPA. It will be worth the £10.00 because its pretty certain they wont have much on there to prove their case. Note I am not qualified to give advice, but I can tell you what to expect.
Cheers

[Southerner]

Re: Lowell and 3 mobile

Thanks,

There is a value for two months contract and then a second item for ETF.

I have now passed the matter over to my Solicitor to deal with as getting fed up of letter tennis and going round in circles.

[Roy Clayton]

Re: Lowell and 3 mobile

I have written to the Guardian's consumer champions so maybe if enough people do the same they might be more inclined to run a story. Lowell say they own 8 milion acounts, but from my own SAR request they had virtually no information whatsoever. Reminder that Lowell should be responsible for providing all information about the account even prior to transfer. They are the Data Controller IF they have absolute assignment. BBC Watchdog already ran a programme in January 2009 on 3 Mobile selling contracts to Lowell. Also check out Ofcom rulling CW000888/01/06 if your 3 mobile issues are prior to 2006. The terms were ruled potentially unfair. Google 3 mobile unfair terms May 2006 and it comes up.

I won my court case and Judgement was entered against them, but Lowell have not paid up yet. The sheer hypocracy of a DCA telling people they have not paid debts and they dont pay their own debts.

[Southerner]

Re: Lowell and 3 mobile

I've now received an offer of 50% off the money 'owed'. And that's before they've even received my solicitors letter.

[ODC]

Re: Lowell and 3 mobile

50% of nothing is still nothing

[Southerner]

Re: Lowell and 3 mobile

50% of nothing is still nothing

Nearly six months on playing letter tennis between my solicitor and Lowells and they are still at it.

They are now backing down slightly suggesting that 'Three' would now accept a settlement of a lower figure than the 'debt' they have been chasing. My solicitor has suggested I offer to pay the two months of calls that they are saying I owe.

My thinking is that since Lowells would have bought the debt, then it is unlikely that they have gone back to Three at all ? And since they'd have bought the debt for 20p, why the hell should I pay for two months of calls (approx £60) when they STILL haven't proved that I actually own anything at all !!!

Any advice would be appreciated.

[ODC]

Re: Lowell and 3 mobile

Crimilowells have diddly squat otherwise they wouldn't be back peddling. Tell them if they are so confident then you wiil see them in court. The fact you have a real solicitor should prove you're serious