Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

Thank you FP, so I send and sar request to crap 1. Do I need to inform lowlife that I'm doing this in order to put them on hold? I don't want them to file for a ccj, I've got enough problems with one.

No, a SAR is just for information and doesn't put an account on hold, but it can help you get the data you need to establish your position. They can't just file a CCJ, :nono: they'll have to follow a process, starting with a claim you can defend.

Remind me again, have you sent a CCA request to Lowell for this account?

With regard to ccj, what do I do when they write to me about this debt?

Thank you.

*IF* they write to you, do post up here before doing anything. :typing: :thumb:

[strong123]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

Baring in mind it's likely they are unaware of ccj.

[strong123]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

You'd send a SAR to the original lender to obtain historical info such as statements which will detail payment history. In theory they should also supply you with a copy of your agreement and letters, in reality they don't always do so. A SAR is just for information rather than to put the account in dispute, and they have 40 days to respond.

When you send a CCA request and they don't comply, you can put the account in dispute on the basis of non-compliance within 14 days.

If you send a SAR to the original creditor (as you should, Lowell wouldn't have historical data), there is no reason you should get threatograms because they've already sold the account. :thumb:

No, they won't, they'd have to go back to the court as the warrant they obtained is 7 years old!

As noted above, best thing to do about the CCJ is to let sleeping dogs snooze away.

Thank you FP, so I send and sar request to crap 1. Do I need to inform lowlife that I'm doing this in order to put them on hold? I don't want them to file for a ccj, I've got enough problems with one.

With regard to ccj, what do I do when they write to me about this debt?

Thank you.

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

I just contacted northampton county court, spoke to a lovely woman about my ccj.
After giving her the case number she told me that the claimant name is still equidebt who we know is no longer.

I am astounded that there is still any data on the system about that CCJ. It has long since dropped off the CCJ Registry and the main three Credit Reference Agencies; whether or not there remains any data at National Hunter (the "secret" CRA used by the clearing banks, of which mere customers are not supposed to know - see attachment and link) or CIFAS (link) may be another matter, but I'd doubt there would be.

But as there was a warrant issued in 2006 (you'll remember I had a warrant with no date) that is this one....I think?? Actually it might not be.

It would still be difficult to enforce.

Anyway she suggested I contact bow.

Bow?

Who they?

She actually told me, maybe I shouldn't bother pursuing it if it's in equidebt name

Good advice, but...

and seek legal advise with the view of getting it set aside as equidebt are no longer...

In my opinion, that would be a futile exercise. You'd need a cogent defence (lack of any copy of the executed agreement might not suffice) and judges are reluctant to overturn or set aside judgements after more than a decade.

although obviously she wasn't advising because she's cephalo-proctally intromitted. (link)

IFYPFY. :rofl:

Do any of you know if this is possible?

After eleven years have elapsed, you'd probably find it easier to ensure that Accrington Stanley (link) wins the Champions' League.

Also would still very much appreciate if any of you would know what sort of letter I could send regarding crap 1. Thank you again.

Why waste a stamp on those onanists?

[Angry Cat]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

You need to leave it alone [Emphasis Added]

[strong123]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

Well until someone substitutes their name on the CCJ then I would leave well alone. Sorry I get confused, its an age thing you know...or all the pills I pop ..is someone chasing you for that one?

So far lowlife haven't written about the one with ccj at my aunts address, but had at a previous address.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

So just to recap, I have 3 debts which are all with lowlife, one of which had a cc issued in 02 for equidebt.

I have only received a letter to my aunts house from bc solicitors asking me to confirm I live there, which I don't, this was sent end of august, and I received a letter to my aunts house again from lowlife about a crap1 account.

Having gone through the old equifax and experian report dated 04, I have noticed that there is no account details on there for the crap 1 card, only a search done in 04. Which leads me to believe this was when I must have taken the card out. With that in mind, if the payments from my bank account where made in 08 & 09 the debt would not be SB. this would be the same for the 02 account if the payments where for that too. (Remembering there where 2 separate amounts)

I do not want them to slap me with a ccj for either of these, therefore I'm wondering if there is a letter I can send to them putting the account/s (I'm sure they are going to right to me about all 3 at somepoint) in dispute as I'd like clarification as to when the account where open, when they defaulted....basically everything they have on them.

If I have to pay, I have to pay but I want to make sure that I do.

You'd send a SAR to the original lender to obtain historical info such as statements which will detail payment history. In theory they should also supply you with a copy of your agreement and letters, in reality they don't always do so. A SAR is just for information rather than to put the account in dispute, and they have 40 days to respond.

When you send a CCA request and they don't comply, you can put the account in dispute on the basis of non-compliance within 14 days.

I realise that this is going to open me up to a bombardment of threatograms but I can't keep burying my head hoping it will go away.

If you send a SAR to the original creditor (as you should, Lowell wouldn't have historical data), there is no reason you should get threatograms because they've already sold the account. :thumb:

With regard to the one with ccj, when they write to me about that, is there a letter template I can write to them to query what details they have? I.e. I wanna know if they have the ccj in their name or even know about it.

Its funny, I checked the date of eci debt collections on behalf of equidebt and they wrote 1 day before the 6 years to the day the ccj was issued!

They may well of attempted bailiff action within the time limit given...I was hardly ever at my house because I was never there, my brother was tho.

Thanks for your help again guys, I'm finding this so stressful.

No, they won't, they'd have to go back to the court as the warrant they obtained is 7 years old!

As noted above, best thing to do about the CCJ is to let sleeping dogs snooze away.

[Angry Cat]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

Well until someone substitutes their name on the CCJ then I would leave well alone. Sorry I get confused, its an age thing you know...or all the pills I pop ..is someone chasing you for that one?

Agree, leave well alone!

[jon1965]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

Well until someone substitutes their name on the CCJ then I would leave well alone. Sorry I get confused, its an age thing you know...or all the pills I pop ..is someone chasing you for that one?

[strong123]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

Hi again, (I'm sure your really bored of hearing from me)

I'm back with some new discoveries and need some advice.

So just to recap, I have 3 debts which are all with lowlife, one of which had a cc issued in 02 for equidebt.

I have only received a letter to my aunts house from bc solicitors asking me to confirm I live there, which I don't, this was sent end of august, and I received a letter to my aunts house again from lowlife about a crap1 account.

Having gone through the old equifax and experian report dated 04, I have noticed that there is no account details on there for the crap 1 card, only a search done in 04. Which leads me to believe this was when I must have taken the card out. With that in mind, if the payments from my bank account where made in 08 & 09 the debt would not be SB. this would be the same for the 02 account if the payments where for that too. (Remembering there where 2 separate amounts)

I do not want them to slap me with a ccj for either of these, therefore I'm wondering if there is a letter I can send to them putting the account/s (I'm sure they are going to right to me about all 3 at somepoint) in dispute as I'd like clarification as to when the account where open, when they defaulted....basically everything they have on them.

If I have to pay, I have to pay but I want to make sure that I do.

I realise that this is going to open me up to a bombardment of threatograms but I can't keep burying my head hoping it will go away.

With regard to the one with ccj, when they write to me about that, is there a letter template I can write to them to query what details they have? I.e. I wanna know if they have the ccj in their name or even know about it.

Its funny, I checked the date of eci debt collections on behalf of equidebt and they wrote 1 day before the 6 years to the day the ccj was issued!

They may well of attempted bailiff action within the time limit given...I was hardly ever at my house because I was never there, my brother was tho.

Thanks for your help again guys, I'm finding this so stressful.

Ok, so I have another update....the puzzle unravels...

I just contacted northampton county court, spoke to a lovely woman about my ccj.

After giving her the case number she told me that the claimant name is still equidebt who we know is no longer.

But as there was a warrant issued in 2006 (you'll remember I had a warrant with no date) that is this one....I think?? Actually it might not be. Anyway she suggested I contact bow.
She actually told me, maybe I shouldn't bother pursuing it if it's in equidebt name and seek legal advise with the view of getting it set aside as equidebt are no longer...although obviously she was.nt advising because she's not legally minded.

Do any of you know if this is possible?

Also would still very much appreciate if any of you would know what sort of letter I could send regarding crap 1. Thank you again.

[strong123]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

Hi again, (I'm sure your really bored of hearing from me)

I'm back with some new discoveries and need some advice.

So just to recap, I have 3 debts which are all with lowlife, one of which had a cc issued in 02 for equidebt.

I have only received a letter to my aunts house from bc solicitors asking me to confirm I live there, which I don't, this was sent end of august, and I received a letter to my aunts house again from lowlife about a crap1 account.

Having gone through the old equifax and experian report dated 04, I have noticed that there is no account details on there for the crap 1 card, only a search done in 04. Which leads me to believe this was when I must have taken the card out. With that in mind, if the payments from my bank account where made in 08 & 09 the debt would not be SB. this would be the same for the 02 account if the payments where for that too. (Remembering there where 2 separate amounts)

I do not want them to slap me with a ccj for either of these, therefore I'm wondering if there is a letter I can send to them putting the account/s (I'm sure they are going to right to me about all 3 at somepoint) in dispute as I'd like clarification as to when the account where open, when they defaulted....basically everything they have on them.

If I have to pay, I have to pay but I want to make sure that I do.

I realise that this is going to open me up to a bombardment of threatograms but I can't keep burying my head hoping it will go away.

With regard to the one with ccj, when they write to me about that, is there a letter template I can write to them to query what details they have? I.e. I wanna know if they have the ccj in their name or even know about it.

Its funny, I checked the date of eci debt collections on behalf of equidebt and they wrote 1 day before the 6 years to the day the ccj was issued!

They may well of attempted bailiff action within the time limit given...I was hardly ever at my house because I was never there, my brother was tho.

Thanks for your help again guys, I'm finding this so stressful.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

My friend had a SD delivered through her door (not sure if it was posted or hand delivered) whilst she was on holiday + letter from the solicitor apparently sent 7 days earlier. Cel now has this one in hand but I had wondered if this was served correctly. I thought that was the case that it had to be delivered using a process server. It certainly was not sent recorded as she was not their to sign it.

http://www.insolvencydirect.bis.gov....10/part_10.htm

45.94 Service of the statutory demand
The creditor is bound to do all that is reasonable to ensure that the demand is brought to the debtor’s attention, including personally serving the statutory demand on the debtor if practicable [Note 5].

45.95 Substituted service
Where it is not possible to effect prompt personal service, service may be effected by other means such as first class post or insertion through a letter box [Note 6]. For this to be acceptable to the court, the creditor must have taken similar steps to those which would persuade the court to grant an order for substituted service of a petition [Note 7] (see paragraph 45.121). In Re A Debtor [Note 8] it was confirmed by Blackett Ord QC that in some cases it may be appropriate to serve the statutory demand upon the Solicitors of the debtor. The Rules do not allow for service of a statutory demand by electronic means [Note 9].

See below, basically they have to show they have taken reasonable steps to bring the SD to the debtor's attention.
PRACTICE DIRECTION – INSOLVENCY PROCEEDINGS

Substituted service of statutory demands
13.3

(13.3.1)
The creditor is under an obligation to do all that is reasonable to bring the statutory demand to the debtor's attention and, if practicable, to cause personal service to be effected (rule 6.3(2)).

(13.3.2)
In the circumstances set out in rule 6.3(3) the demand may instead be advertised. As there is no statutory form of advertisement, the court will accept an advertisement in the following form....

(13.3.3)
Where personal service is not effected or the demand is not advertised in the limited circumstances permitted by rule 6.3(3), substituted service is permitted, but the creditor must have taken all those steps which would justify the court making an order for substituted service of a petition. The steps to be taken to obtain an order for substituted service of a petition are set out below. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in the court declining to issue the petition (rule 6.11(9)) or dismissing it.

(13.3.4)
In most cases, evidence of the following steps will suffice to justify acceptance for presentation of a petition where the statutory demand has been served by substituted service (or to justify making an order for substituted service of a petition) –

(1) One personal call at the residence and place of business of the debtor where both are known or at either of such places as is known. Where it is known that the debtor has more than one residential or business address, personal calls should be made at all the addresses.

(2) Should the creditor fail to effect personal service, a first class prepaid letter should be written to the debtor referring to the call(s), the purpose of the same and the failure to meet the debtor, adding that a further call will be made for the same purpose on the [day] of [month] 20[ ] at [ ] hours at [place]. At least two business days' notice should be given of the appointment and copies of the letter sent to all known addresses of the debtor. The appointment letter should also state that:

(a) in the event of the time and place not being convenient, the debtor should propose some other time and place reasonably convenient for the purpose;

(b) (In the case of a statutory demand) if the debtor fails to keep the appointment the creditor proposes to serve the debtor by [advertisement] [post] [insertion through a letter box] or as the case may be, and that, in the event of a bankruptcy petition being presented, the court will be asked to treat such service as service of the demand on the debtor;

(c) (In the case of a petition) if the debtor fails to keep the appointment, application will be made to the Court for an order for substituted service either by advertisement, or in such other manner as the court may think fit.

(3) When attending any appointment made by letter, inquiry should be made as to whether the debtor has received all letters left for him. If the debtor is away, inquiry should also be made as to whether or not letters are being forwarded to an address within the jurisdiction (England and Wales) or elsewhere.

(4) If the debtor is represented by a solicitor, an attempt should be made to arrange an appointment for personal service through such solicitor. The Insolvency Rules enable a solicitor to accept service of a statutory demand on behalf of his client but there is no similar provision in respect of service of a bankruptcy petition.

(5) The certificate of service of a statutory demand filed pursuant to rule 6.11 should deal with all the above matters including all relevant facts as to the debtor's whereabouts and whether the appointment letter(s) have been returned. It should also set out the reasons for the belief that the debtor resides at the relevant address or works at the relevant place of business and whether, so far as is known, the debtor is represented by a solicitor.

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

Thanks Jon

My friend had a SD delivered through her door (not sure if it was posted or hand delivered) whilst she was on holiday + letter from the solicitor apparently sent 7 days earlier. Cel now has this one in hand but I had wondered if this was served correctly. I thought that was the case that it had to be delivered using a process server. It certainly was not sent recorded as she was not their to sign it.

Google serving statutory demand. They should serve by hand or use a process server. It can be put through the door or send recorded delivery. I think using a last known address makes it easy money for Kate.

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

The should be reported to the OFT, the body responsible for consumer credit licensing. But they seem as useless as the Fobbing Off Service!

IFYPFY. :grin:

I believe they may be even less useful than a Chinese spanner made from soft tin.

Also using SDs as a debt collection tool is an abuse of process, they should be going down the CCJ route rather than the insolvency route to recover debts. They issue SDs because they often haven't got the paperwork required in court, so they try to scare people into paying without questioning the paperwork.

On occasions, the debt was never even owed !

I refer, of course, to the celebrated antics of the property "tycoon" and legend in his own tea-time, Karl Nolan - link

It's a long thread, but it's worth reading - if only to see my photos of (and acerbic comments about) his property "empire".

Glossary

IFYPFY - acronym, for I Fixed Your Post For You; a commonplace Internet meme, often used for comic effect.

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

They do not issue enough SD's if you ask me. I know a debt dodger from leicestershire that deserves a SD or even 2:tinysmile_grin_t:

You? :grin: