Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

[Angry Cat]

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

I have 3 debts, they all defaulted around the same time. They have all been with several dcas, lowell now owning all of them. They must have felt like they hit the jackpot. Clever cloggs mention about getting a report that he paid a tenner for which I'd like to do. I can't go on my memory because by all accounts I was paying for something I didn't even know!

I know I got baby brain but this is plain silly! Lol

That is exactly why you have to be careful, not that I advocate people shirking their debt responsibilities.
But, because I despise the Lowell Group, who do not play fair or abide by the OFT guidance on debt collection!
And, I have seen similar RE: 1st Credit/Connaught...

[Angry Cat]

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

RE: the CCJ, they would have to explain to any Judge, as to why they have waited so long to enforce;
doubtful that any Judge would wear that after so long!

[Angry Cat]

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

You need to check against all various addresses that it could have been granted:
http://www.trustonline.org.uk/

You really do need to make a FULL SAR to Lowell!
Send the request letter plus Postal Order for the statutory Fee: £10
Mark the postal order: DPA SAR Statutory Fee ONLY; keep a copy and;
keep a copy of the letter;
send by Royal Mail Recorded Delivery.

[Emphasis] this in not an admittance of any debt/debts that they may purport to be owed, it is a legal request under The Data Protection Act 1998.

The Leeds Losers are lowlife SCUM, right at the bottom of the stinking cesspit of the DCA industry; I spit on them with contempt!!!

[strong123]

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

Now there's only your other "dirty secret"?

... that you fake orgasm! msl:

Lol, bloody hell, barely saw that!!

[strong123]

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

Thanks angry cat, I hate them too!

[FlamingParrot]

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

Just let you know. Pm'd you.

Just wonder then, equidebt went into admin, lowell bought debt. Hyperthetically speaking, they receive no ccj paperwork or had it transferred in their name, it's dropped off registry (I know this as I have checked) and therefore no ccj?? Is it then sb?

I see...

As noted above, CCJs are not SBd, however, they will find it hard to explain to a court why they haven't made any attempt to enforce a CCJ granted 11 years ago! :incourt:

[FlamingParrot]

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

You need to check against all various addresses that it could have been granted:
http://www.trustonline.org.uk/

It won't show up regardless of what address you use because they fall off the record after 6 years: http://www.trustonline.org.uk/unders...-what-are-they

The Register of Judgments, Orders and Fines records CCJs for 6 years.

...and this one was obtained 11 years ago!

So, after doing some digging around I found some paper work, I'm going to work from the most worrying one and largest amount first.

I came across an old equufax report which shows a ccj issued in 2002.

You really do need to make a FULL SAR to Lowell!
Send the request letter plus Postal Order for the statutory Fee: £10

What are the chances of obtaining 11 year old data? Most banks will only send data for the last 6 years when you send a SAR, that's certainly always been the case with me.

[Angry Cat]

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

If, Lowell obtained a CCJ by default, then they will still have it on there system...!
And, details of should be provided within your SAR.
Please note, that the County Court that it was obtained in won't have any details as they only retain for a few years.

In any event, it is extremely unlikely that any Judge would enforce same after all this time;
the question would be asked:
Why hasn't same been enforced earlier?

[Angry Cat]

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

FF, we are not talking about a Bank, we are talking a DCA: Lowell!

[jon1965]

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

I have 2 CCjs both from sometime in the 90's. I had been paying them both until about 18months ago. When I called CDCS (Barclays) the guy there actual said to me that if I stopped paying there was nothing they could do. Barclays themselves had recycled my account number and had no record. That was 1600. The other was a mere 248 . I have had, I think 1 letter about each and then nothing.

Only my experience but hope it helps ease your mind...Oh and Cloggy when you were young enough did you never fake anything:tinysmile_twink_t2:

[Angry Cat]

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

...Oh and Cloggy when you were young enough did you never fake anything:tinysmile_twink_t2:

Hermaphrodite, perhaps? LOL X

[strong123]

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

It won't show up regardless of what address you use because they fall off the record after 6 years: http://www.trustonline.org.uk/unders...-what-are-they



...and this one was obtained 11 years ago!



What are the chances of obtaining 11 year old data? Most banks will only send data for the last 6 years when you send a SAR, that's certainly always been the case with me.

Thank you all. I did check out all my previous address' with trustonline and no ccj registered. I even called the court in northampton and they told me they wouldn't have any details as it was so far back. She did tell me that a debt was bought by a new owner the new owner would have to apply for the ccj to be transferred into their name as the claimant and they could only do this if they had the original paperwork. Baring in mind equidebt had it and was the original claimant and then sold to lowell. I understand that ccj are never sb and this is hopeful thinking, if lowlife don't have original papers, not in their name, simply no record of this other than me. Technically the ccj never existed and therefore as the debt is 11 years old can it then be sb
After if only I have a record...which can be destroyed..mwahaha...then how can there be a ccj?
Of course this is in theory because they may well have all the paperwork! Lol

[CleverClogs]

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

If, Lowell obtained a CCJ by default, then they will still have it on there system...!

They didn't: -

I came across an old equifax report which shows a ccj issued in 2002.
I then found a notice of warrant of execution from northampton court (no date on it) to pay sum of £152.25. The claimant, equidebt.
I then found a letter from eci debt collectors, client equidebt sent in April 08. This debt now belongs to lowell.

And, details of should be provided within your SAR.

I doubt that Lowlifes will have any details about it and there seems little risk of them learning about it as Equidebt has gone bust.
One might even say that there is probably more chance of me getting pregnant.

In any event, it is extremely unlikely that any Judge would enforce same after all this time;
the question would be asked:
Why hasn't same been enforced earlier?

One thing seems obvious - if that is the way they did business, it is hardly any wonder that Equidebt went bust.

[strong123]

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

If, Lowell obtained a CCJ by default, then they will still have it on there system...!
And, details of should be provided within your SAR.
Please note, that the County Court that it was obtained in won't have any details as they only retain for a few years.

In any event, it is extremely unlikely that any Judge would enforce same after all this time;
the question would be asked:
Why hasn't same been enforced earlier?

They were not original owner of ccj and no other ccj or paperwork relating to such since. They can only of had this since 08 as that was last letter from equidebt.

[CleverClogs]

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

FF, we are not talking about a Bank, we are talking a DCA: Lowell!

Yes.

And we should know how inept they are.