lowell portfollio 1

[stevejay]

How can lowell persist in chasing individuals on behalf of the original supplier without first checking if any disputes were active?. Surely this has to be proven first. Just tried to serve me with a statutory demand,

[bluebottle]

Re: lowell portfollio 1

Did you tell them to go away in rather strong terms? If they have tried to serve you with a Statutory Demand and do not have a right in law to do so, that is serious. And, yes, they do have to prove you are liable for a debt, as well as having the right to serve a Statutory Demand. I am attaching a copy of the OFT Debt Collections Guidelines for your information. Also, I would urge you to make a formal complaint to the OFT's Credit Fitness Team by email to enquiries@oft.gsi.gov.uk. Insert the words CREDIT FITNESS in the subject box. Lowells OFT Credit Licence Number is 0528607. Give a clear and concise resume of your complaint.

[stevejay]

Re: lowell portfollio 1

Hi Bluebottle

Thanks, I have contacted the OFT and reported them for harassment which I understand is a criminal offence. They were not acting on the courts instructions. My opinion is that Lowell believe they are above the law. Will let you know of progress.

[bluebottle]

Re: lowell portfollio 1

Thank you for posting up that Lowells were not acting under the authority of a court. It is a criminal offence, under Section 135, County Courts Act 1984, to pretend you are acting under the authority of a court and carries a custodial sentence of up to 7 years' imprisonment. Yes, you are correct about harassment being a criminal offence. In your particular case, it would be Section 2, Protection from Harassment Act 1997. However, it is a summary offence and only carries a maximum penalty of a fine of up to £20,000, or up to 6 months imprisonment or both. There is case law in the form of Ferguson -v- British Gas Trading Ltd 2009 which means a company can be proceeded against, under Section 3, Protection from Harassment Act 1997 for harassing an individual. If you have been granted an injunction under Section 3, breaching such an injunction carries a maximum penalty of an unlimited fine, or up to 5 years' imprisonment or both. If you need to apply for an injunction to restrain Lowells, come back onto this thread and I'll talk you through it. However, I must stress that an injunction is the last resort when all other forms of restraint have failed. There may also be a case to answer, on Lowells' part, under Section 1, Malicious Communications Act 1988 for sending a letter or other postal communication containing a threat, and if they have used emails, there is a provision under Section 127, Communications Act 2003 to clobber them. If the court has confirmed to you that Lowells' were acting ultra vires (outside the law) and this is in written or email form, send it to the OFT's Credit Fitness Team asap. (Scan any written material and attach to an email.) Some DCAs think that debtors are stupid and don't know the law. Lowells is one such DCA. They are about to find out differently.

[QCKate]

Re: lowell portfollio 1

Hi Bluebottle

Thanks, I have contacted the OFT and reported them for harassment which I understand is a criminal offence. They were not acting on the courts instructions. My opinion is that Lowell believe they are above the law. Will let you know of progress.

Lowell have form, Steve. See this from BBC Watchdog

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/watchdog/...ot_always.html

QCK

[stevejay]

Re: lowell portfollio 1

Bluebottle. Have my reference number of complaint from OFT. Just waiting to hear from them. Many thanks.

[bluebottle]

Re: lowell portfollio 1

Keep us informed, please, Stevejay. It will be interesting to see what happens. Don't forget to report the matter to Trading Standards, as well as the OFT Credit Fitness Team.

[stevejay]

Re: lowell portfollio 1

Thanks bluebottle. I was served statutory demand notice by a company called Lewis Investigations Services who themselves were not acting on the courts instructions.

[bluebottle]

Re: lowell portfollio 1

If it is, indeed, the case that neither Lewis Investigations Service or Lowells were not acting on the courts instructions, this is not the first time Lowells have been caught doing this. Please be assured such behaviour is serious. Get professional legal advice from your local Law Centre in respect of the SD and set aside. Law Centres provide free legal advice. Also, get a complaint off to the OFT's Credit Fitness Team against Lowells asap.

[stevejay]

Re: lowell portfollio 1

I will do that straight away, many thanks.

[bluebottle]

Re: lowell portfollio 1

Lewis Investigation Services are part of The Lewis Group, another DCA, like Lowells. Report them to the OFT as well. Their Company Registration Number is SC127043 and their Credit Licence Number is 0324496.

[stevejay]

Re: lowell portfollio 1

Hi Bluebottle. I have reported them and the Trading Standards are investigating. I won't let it drop. The process server thought he was clever at the front door and since, LIS Ltd are trying to be "ever so nice" as though their the victim here.

[bluebottle]

Re: lowell portfollio 1

Hi Bluebottle. I have reported them and the Trading Standards are investigating. I won't let it drop. The process server thought he was clever at the front door and since, LIS Ltd are trying to be "ever so nice" as though their the victim here.

Playing the victim is one of the principal hallmarks and tactics of a bully, in my experience. Lewis Group are going to get a taste of their own medicine very soon by the sound of it. Good for you! If TS and OFT advise you of an Adverse Determination against either Lowells or Lewis, this means they are considering refusing renewal of or revoking their credit licences. If you are advised of a Formal Warning against either or both of them, although it is not as desirable as an Adverse Determination, it is, neverthless, a warning to Lowells and Lewis they are drinking in the Last Chance Saloon.

[stevejay]

Re: lowell portfollio 1

You are correct in you analysis of a bully. I received a letter yesterday from Hampton's. Trying every trick there is. I assume that my legal rights extend to pursuing these through the civil courts if I choose?.

[teaboy2]

Re: lowell portfollio 1

Just butting in here to let you know that you do not need the courts permission to issue a satutory demand. So long as the debt is over £750 and the demand is served in person then they have fully compiled with the process. However they will still have to prove the debt is yours in court but thats if you contest it by appliyng of the satutory demand to be set aside. So you need to apply to have it set aside by filling in form 6.5, you also only have a 18 days from the date the demand was served to do this. So its very important that you get it set aside ASAP. IF you do not apply for the set aside then they can make you bankrupt!!