Time to report Lowell to oft....

[ODC]

Re: Time to report Lowell to oft....

We have a big advantage in that the site owner has dealt very successfully with the maggots on behalf of very many people from all over the UK who works for a respected law firm. Surely if she were allowed to give evidence it would prove their abuse of the system.

[Celestine]

Re: Time to report Lowell to oft....

On the issue of the statutory demand being dated 4 weeks earlier than the service of the demand, I can't find anything in the rules that prevent this.

The critical 6.5 Insolvency application to set aside contains this KEY phrase:
"1. That on (b) (DATE)
the statutory demand exhibited hereto and marked “A” came into my hands."


So we totally ignore the drafting date and only the service date matters. However, consumers are unaware of this and the SD date causes great fear and worry.


The other area I believe needs REAL work is the conduct of the Judges who hear set aside applications for LIPs and are far too preferential to the creditor. This could be addressed via the MOJ with the suggestion of greater CCA awareness amongst County Court Judges hearing these cases.

[enaid]

Re: Time to report Lowell to oft....

Is there no such thing as specialist judges?
There are specialists everything else but just like GPs they know a little about a lot ,but a lot about nothing and this is very dangerous imo. Thing is though a GP can send you to a specialist if need be a judge just seems to fumble along.

[EXC]

Re: Time to report Lowell to oft....

Is there no such thing as specialist judges?

No not really and I remember how surprised I was that the judge in the first instance test case hearing came straight from sentencing two boys for murder.

[ODC]

Re: Time to report Lowell to oft....

On the issue of the statutory demand being dated 4 weeks earlier than the service of the demand, I can't find anything in the rules that prevent this.

The critical 6.5 Insolvency application to set aside contains this KEY phrase:
"1. That on (b) (DATE)
the statutory demand exhibited hereto and marked “A” came into my hands."


So we totally ignore the drafting date and only the service date matters. However, consumers are unaware of this and the SD date causes great fear and worry.


The other area I believe needs REAL work is the conduct of the Judges who hear set aside applications for LIPs and are far too preferential to the creditor. This could be addressed via the MOJ with the suggestion of greater CCA awareness amongst County Court Judges hearing these cases.

I take your point but what I'm saying is that with all the SDs you have dealt with involving these shysters surely it would not be hard to show a pattern that would prove beyond reasonable doubt that it was a deliberate policy and then suggest to the 'authorities' the probable reason for this.

[Ruby]

Re: Time to report Lowell to oft....

I have three 'accounts' with lowell. They send me threat-o-matics from various parts of their 'company' from time to time. I give their letters a quick glance and then they go straight in the bin! This has been going on for years and I am sure the accounts are almost S.B'd now. They know they don't have a leg to stand on as the accounts are so old and are unenforceable.

Question :confused2: :- Has anyone in Scotland ever received a SD?

The buggers have messed with my credit file (a matter for another day) but other than that they have been completely toothless........

[bluebottle]

Re: Time to report Lowell to oft....

On the issue of the statutory demand being dated 4 weeks earlier than the service of the demand, I can't find anything in the rules that prevent this.

The critical 6.5 Insolvency application to set aside contains this KEY phrase:
"1. That on (b) (DATE)
the statutory demand exhibited hereto and marked “A” came into my hands."


So we totally ignore the drafting date and only the service date matters. However, consumers are unaware of this and the SD date causes great fear and worry.


The other area I believe needs REAL work is the conduct of the Judges who hear set aside applications for LIPs and are far too preferential to the creditor. This could be addressed via the MOJ with the suggestion of greater CCA awareness amongst County Court Judges hearing these cases.

Sending them all on a one-day training course might well help the situation, Cel. Those judges who show undue partiality towards creditors should, perhaps, be investigated to find out why they are showing partiality, especially when the evidence indicates that judgement should be in favour of the debtor.

[dogtired]

Re: Time to report Lowell to oft....

With all the cases Cel has dealt with surely this must be a sign that Lowell's are acting illegally or at the very best questionably.
I did report Mucky Hall but only got the standard reply from OFT they they would continue to monitor them, however with no wish to tempt fate have not heard from them since the start of August, Wescott/ Arrow global are still, "looking for information from the OC" and again not heard from them since September!

http://www.oft.gov.uk/news-and-updates/press/2009/44-09

Think it was Angry Cat that sent me this and noticed you had asked for it on the origanlal thread.

[bluebottle]

Re: Time to report Lowell to oft....

If anyone needs to complain about Lowells or any other DCA for that matter, send an email to enquiries@oft.gov.uk, inserting the words "Credit Fitness" in the subject box. Stating the DCA's name and OFT Licence Number at the head of the email is essential, as is listing all and any breaches of OFT Debt Collection Guidelines. This will show the nature and extent of a DCA's non-compliance with the rules. And make sure you copy the email to your local Trading Standards Department.

[Ruby]

Re: Time to report Lowell to oft....

Bluebottle, I have done what you mentioned on various occasions and got their generic response back. The OFT are fast asleep and/or else not interested!!

[Guest]

Re: Time to report Lowell to oft....

Yes one off complaints to the OFT usually return the polite, "we cannot intervene in individual complaint, please go to your CAB or the FOS" response.

To be honest, i am unsure about what exactly a complaint to the OFT would contain. The OFT enforce the relevant legislative protection, unless you can quote a section of the act which has been breached, I so not think they can act anyway.

I know that various DCA,s have been warned about the indiscriminate use of SD's, but my understanding was that in those cases the complaint was that they breached the OFT guidelines, in that they were threatening actions that they would(or could) not take. This is not the case with Lowell as we know they do carry out their threats.

I think that it is the system itself which needs revising, perhaps limiting the variety of SD which can be issued in CCA cases to the ones that require a judgement, or increasing the financial limit to £10k.

If this was the aim perhaps letters to your MP would be a better avenue.

[bluebottle]

Re: Time to report Lowell to oft....

Bluebottle, I have done what you mentioned on various occasions and got their generic response back. The OFT are fast asleep and/or else not interested!!

I know where you can lay your hands on some explosives that can take a warship out if you want to stick a bomb under their backsides.:grin:

[dogtired]

Re: Time to report Lowell to oft....

I know where you can lay your hands on some explosives that can take a warship out if you want to stick a bomb under their backsides.:grin:

Bluebottle! Now that is a good idea!:tinysmile_aha_t:

[Ruby]

Re: Time to report Lowell to oft....

:target: Where can I get my hands on these explosives? Guy Fawkes is just round the corner ........ the thought of putting Lowells and others like them on top of the bon fire makes my heart skip a beat

[strong123]

Re: Time to report Lowell to oft....

Hi all, glad to see everyone is making good use of this thread.

Thanks for the info celestine, it's good to know what is and isn't lawful before going in all guns blazing just to be shot down

From what I understand with regard to OFT is that in order for them to open an investigation there would have to be a certain level of complaints about one thing in particular. So it would not warrant an investigation if for instance 3 complaint of harassment, 7 for SD and so on.

I am going to contact the OFT tomorrow to see what I can get out of them with regard to this.

I think a definite change in the law is needed, as most of you had suggested with regard to SD and I'm more than happy to contact the relevant people to put forward my plea.