Lowell verses Pensioner

[longinthetooth]

Hello.

My mum ended up getting into a bit of a mess with a Littlewoods catalogue. They passed the debt onto the NDR (nationwide Debt Recovery Limited) who in turn passed it to the Lowell Group. It was at this poit that I found out about my Mums problem.

The first thing I did was to contact Lowells and tell them that I would be dealing with them from now on. Their reply was fine but they would need my mum to give them permission to speak to me because of Data protection (right or wrong) so I said OK. I asked them to send the letter to my address so I could read it first before my mum signed it.

Two months later, no letter so I contacted them again. Same as above but still no letter. In the meantime my mum was getting calls from RED and I told my mum to tell them one thing only "My son is dealing with it" and hang up which she did.

Now she is getting calls from Hampton Legal Threatening with Bailiffs.

None of the above would bother me as I know how to deal with them in my own way but I would like to know if there is any one who could advise me on similar happenings with Lowells.

Thankyou.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Lowell verses Pensioner

Welcome to the Lowell Fan Club!

Red and Hampton Legal are all part of the Lowell Lowlife group: http://www.lowell.co.uk/who-is-red-debt.aspx

With regards to bailiffs, that's a threat they shouldn't be making, because they can't just send them round, they would have to go to court and obtain a CCJ in their favour, then go back to the court and apply for a warrant of execution before bailiffs can be sent for a debt of that nature. In fact, even with a CCJ, the chances of bailiffs being sent for a debt like that are very slim. But we're getting far ahead of ourselves here, since no CCJ has been obtained. :nono:

A lot of those catalogue companies sent out the goods without requiring an agreement to be signed, meaning they are unenforceable. Any idea when those catalogue accounts were opened? Would it have been before April 2007 by any chance? ray:

With regards to the telephone calls, you may want to look at this thread: http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...rom+harassment

[strong123]

Re: Lowell verses Pensioner

Hello.

My mum ended up getting into a bit of a mess with a Littlewoods catalogue. They passed the debt onto the NDR (nationwide Debt Recovery Limited) who in turn passed it to the Lowell Group. It was at this poit that I found out about my Mums problem.

The first thing I did was to contact Lowells and tell them that I would be dealing with them from now on. Their reply was fine but they would need my mum to give them permission to speak to me because of Data protection (right or wrong) so I said OK. I asked them to send the letter to my address so I could read it first before my mum signed it.

Two months later, no letter so I contacted them again. Same as above but still no letter. In the meantime my mum was getting calls from RED and I told my mum to tell them one thing only "My son is dealing with it" and hang up which she did.

Now she is getting calls from Hampton Legal Threatening with Bailiffs.

None of the above would bother me as I know how to deal with them in my own way but I would like to know if there is any one who could advise me on similar happenings with Lowells.

Thankyou.

Hello and welcome to legal beagles!

Your in the right place as many of us here have had dealings with them, so don't worry, your in good hands. Infact the site owner knows them all too well and they fear at the very mention of her name! Hahaha

I only know as much as I've read here but loads will be able to advise.

What I do know is...never ever call them, only ever deal with them in writing.

You have to be very careful with these lowlife.

It might be an idea to put down some dates as to how old debt is, amounts etc. That way people can advise you better.

[longinthetooth]

Re: Lowell verses Pensioner

Sorry, I should have let it be known that I knew Red and Hampton Legal are all part of the Lowell group.

I told me mum not to worry about the bailiffs because they can't just come around but is there somewhere to complain about the threats.

Regarding the goods and an agreement being signed, Some goods have to be signed for usually on a PDR machine. Now is this to prove the goods have been delivered by the courier for their company or is this to prove that you have signed for the goods from the catalogue?

Finally, I will have to ask but I think the account is after 2007.

[strong123]

Re: Lowell verses Pensioner

Sorry, I should have let it be known that I knew Red and Hampton Legal are all part of the Lowell group.

I told me mum not to worry about the bailiffs because they can't just come around but is there somewhere to complain about the threats.

Regarding the goods and an agreement being signed, Some goods have to be signed for usually on a PDR machine. Now is this to prove the goods have been delivered by the courier for their company or is this to prove that you have signed for the goods from the catalogue?

Finally, I will have to ask but I think the account is after 2007.

Thats just to prove they'd been delivered, it doesn't substitute a contract or agreement as flaming parrot was referring to.

It would be good to know date she defaulted payment and last time she acknowledged or made any payment.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Lowell verses Pensioner

Sorry, I should have let it be known that I knew Red and Hampton Legal are all part of the Lowell group.

I told me mum not to worry about the bailiffs because they can't just come around but is there somewhere to complain about the threats.

That would be the Office of Fair Trading (OFT), responsible for Consumer Credit Licensing. Not that they do very much if they did, Lowell would have lost their license years ago.

Regarding the goods and an agreement being signed, Some goods have to be signed for usually on a PDR machine. Now is this to prove the goods have been delivered by the courier for their company or is this to prove that you have signed for the goods from the catalogue?

That's a different kind of signature, you're referring to signing upon receipt of the goods, but that's not relevant for the purposes of the Consumer Credit Act. I was referring to signing a credit agreement when the account was opened.

Finally, I will have to ask but I think the account is after 2007.

That would be a shame, because if it was pre-April 2007, it would most likely be unenforceable due to lack of agreement, however, due to a change in the law, the court has discretion to enforce an agreement entered into after that time. :sad:

[Angry Cat]

Re: Lowell verses Pensioner

Report Lowell to the Office of Fair Trading; the OFT!

Lowell, were quite within their rights in asking for a letter from your Mother; an "Authorisation to Communicate" under the DPA.

Having been provided with that, Lowell should be dealing with you, as they would if, you are your Mother in person;
you can complain to the Information Commissions Office (ICO) if, they fail to comply.

If, you require any information about the purported debt, then you can make a Subject Access Request (SAR) as you hold a valid: "Authorisation to Communicate"!

The Lowell Group are totally out of order, as usual...

[wales01man]

Re: Lowell verses Pensioner

Does anyone think Lowells give a shite they want the money rules don't count intimidation and threats are their rules ,makes me wonder who is protecting them?

[strong123]

Re: Lowell verses Pensioner

Omg, will someone shut them down!!!

They've already been on watchdog, seriously they are vile.

Like you walesman, I wonder if they are being protected...how else can they get away with doing what they do?

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Lowell verses Pensioner

Omg, will someone shut them down!!!

They've already been on watchdog, seriously they are vile.

Like you walesman, I wonder if they are being protected...how else can they get away with doing what they do?

Indeed, we all wonder the same thing. For example, they routinely issue SDs dated 2 to 3 weeks before the date they are hand-delivered, to give the impression you'd missed the deadline to have them set aside! :scared: :scared: :scared: That alone should be enough to lose them their Consumer Credit License! What's the point of having timescales when they can just make up the dates?

They also make up phantom payments when they find they've bought SBd debts.

[strong123]

Re: Lowell verses Pensioner

Personally FP I think it can't be too long before they can keep getting away with it. After didn't I read on another thread that another dca lost their licence and was fined a huge amount of moneyfor the misuse of issuing SDs. It would be interesting to find out what it took for them to finally make that decision!

[Angry Cat]

Re: Lowell verses Pensioner

It is up to the general consumer to Report them to the OFT;
if, people are apathetic Lowell will just keep getting away with it...

All we need, is at least 20 people to log their complaints. Time to make a mass complaint, Guys!

[dogtired]

Re: Lowell verses Pensioner

Personally FP I think it can't be too long before they can keep getting away with it. After didn't I read on another thread that another dca lost their licence and was fined a huge amount of moneyfor the misuse of issuing SDs. It would be interesting to find out what it took for them to finally make that decision!

Who was that? Do tell!

[strong123]

Re: Lowell verses Pensioner

It is up to the general consumer to Report them to the OFT;
if, people are apathetic Lowell will just keep getting away with it...

All we need, is at least 20 people to log their complaints. Time to make a mass complaint, Guys!

I agree, maybe we should open a separate thread....??

[ODC]

Re: Lowell verses Pensioner

I agree, maybe we should open a separate thread....??

I agree. Lets put the Leeds Losers where they belong. I hate and despise them with a passion. The only good thing they ever did was to drive be to sites like this where I learnt how powerless DCAs really are and the low life scum who work for them and profit from other peoples misfortune. Hell will not be full until they are all in it. ALLEGEDLY