Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

[mrroper]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

I am not a lawyer (hence my suggestion to ask one) but it looks like they didn't engage their brain while they were typing, as they are saying a 3 Mobile contract is an agreement regulated by the CCA and we all know that's not the case. Rather strange for a firm of solicitors to make such a mistake on an official document, perhaps they got a work experience kid to do the form!

That's just what I was thinking.

With regards to paperwork, did you ever receive a NoA as stated on the claim? The terms should be the ones on the contract you signed with 3 Mobile. Is that balance for actual usage (calls, data, roaming, etc.), or is it mostly charges added to your account?

Am I OK to PM you about that one? I don't want to say too much on the thread (as I said before, I don't want any DCAs or shyster lawyers trying to identify me).

I would wait for PT's input before firing off the letter, it could well be that they have shot themselves in the foot by describing a mobile contract as a regulated credit agreement.

With a SAR, they would have 40 days to respond. A SAR is a request under the Data Protection Act and totally separate from a request under the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR).

As I understand it, the CPR would need to go to whoever's chasing (the solicitor, in this case), and the SAR to the OC.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

One might also ask when this alleged consumer credit agreement was entered into, as Hutchison 3G UK Limited might not have held a valid consumer credit licence at the time.

See attachments.

[mrroper]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

One might also ask when this alleged consumer credit agreement was entered into, as Hutchison 3G UK Limited might not have held a valid consumer credit licence at the time.

See attachments.

Hi Cleverclogs - that's an interesting thought.

A full four year gap without a Consumer Credit Licence, and no licence to be collecting on debt since 2008 - that could open a can of worms as well.

Would that mean that they have no valid licence to be passing debts that fall under the CCA banner onto other parties?

If that's the case, then would it also mean that any 'arrears' that falls in the 2008-2012 window are invalidated - because the other party no longer held licence to be processing or maintaining such agreements?

Bearing in mind that Drydens have specificially mentioned the CCA as a salient point in their court paperwork - a defaulted credit agreement under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 in their Particulars of Claim.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

That's just what I was thinking.

Am I OK to PM you about that one? I don't want to say too much on the thread (as I said before, I don't want any DCAs or shyster lawyers trying to identify me).

That's OK with me, I see where you're coming from

As I understand it, the CPR would need to go to whoever's chasing (the solicitor, in this case), and the SAR to the OC.

That is correct, the SAR is intended to obtain statements and full account history that solicitors and debt purchasers wouldn't have.

[mrroper]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

That's OK with me, I see where you're coming from.

Just it doesn't pay to reveal too much in an open thread.

That is correct, the SAR is intended to obtain statements and full account history that solicitors and debt purchasers wouldn't have.

That's fine - I'll get a SAR off after the weekend.

[mrroper]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

Also, what do I state to the court once the CPR letter goes off to Dryden?

[bluebottle]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

Hi Bluebottle,

Out of interest, what doubts do you have? If you'd rather not say on this thread, then by all means PM me.

Lowells are well-known for chasing alleged 3 debts. In a number of cases, the alleged debtors didn't even owe any money to 3 or had never had any dealings with 3. Call me a cynical ex-copper, but my gut-feeling is that Lowells know themselves they can't collect. The crap they or Drydens have written on the N1 about the CCA is a potential indication that they know they can't collect and are possibly attempting to mislead the court into believing they can. The CPR request you are making should reveal the strength of Lowell's case.

[mrroper]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

Lowells are well-known for chasing alleged 3 debts. In a number of cases, the alleged debtors didn't even owe any money to 3 or had never had any dealings with 3. Call me a cynical ex-copper, but my gut-feeling is that Lowells know themselves they can't collect. The crap they or Drydens have written on the N1 about the CCA is a potential indication that they know they can't collect and are possibly attempting to mislead the court into believing they can. The CPR request you are making should reveal the strength of Lowell's case.

I did get several 'reduced settlements' offer before the out-of-the-blue court claim came, which leads me to believe the same.

[bluebottle]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

I did get several 'reduced settlements' offer before the out-of-the-blue court claim came, which leads me to believe the same.

The bit I have highlighted in bold type is very telling. It sounds like this is an unenforceable debt, Lowells and Drydens Fairfax know it, but think they can hoodwink a court by claiming it is under the CCA.

[mrroper]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

The bit I have highlighted in bold type is very telling. It sounds like this is an unenforceable debt, Lowells and Drydens Fairfax know it, but think they can hoodwink a court by claiming it is under the CCA.

I'd be interested to see what comes back from the CPR.

Personally, I think they were hoping for a default judgement and aren't expecting a defence to come back from me - it's not going to be working out that way for them.

[daddy2cool]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...-form-received

I have the same issue as you, POC received against a mobile contract but it mentions CCA. I'm tempted to call them tomorrow and negotiate a reduced settlement, I'll mention they could be in contempt of court for making a false declaration on a statement of truth.

[daddy2cool]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

To add, I've had a response to my CPR but they missed the 7 days.

[bluebottle]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...-form-received

I have the same issue as you, POC received against a mobile contract but it mentions CCA. I'm tempted to call them tomorrow and negotiate a reduced settlement, I'll mention they could be in contempt of court for making a false declaration on a statement of truth.

Contempt of Court occurs when a person or commercial entity fails to comply with an instruction by a court to do something or not do something or discloses details of a case into the public domain whilst it is being heard, mainly, reporting of court hearings.

Making a false declaration which misleads a court or would tend to mislead a court can amount to Perjury or Attempting to Pervert the Course of Justice. If this is done by a legal professional, then it should be reported to the relevant regulatory body, as it amounts to serious professional misconduct.

[mrroper]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

Hi everyone,

CPR letter hasn't gone off yet, since I'm hoping to leave them with as little time and room to manoeuvre as possible.

Would timing it so they receive the letter just as my defence is submitted be an idea?

[CleverClogs]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

CPR letter hasn't gone off yet, since I'm hoping to leave them with as little time and room to manoeuvre as possible.

Would timing it so they receive the letter just as my defence is submitted be an idea?

Yes, it would be an idea.

I do not believe it would be a good idea.