Lowell chasing a default from May 2009

[nemesis45]

Re: Lowell chasing a default from May 2009

Ok it looks from what you say that Lowell are attempting to claim that the documents is a reconstituted agreement.
A recon agreement must have all the Ts & Cs at inception and closure of the account
Any document mentioned in the Ts & Cs
Any material amendments to the Ts & C's during the life of the agreement.
Your name and ADDRESS AT INCEPTION.
Creditors "" "" "".
A recon does not have to have signatures but if there is one it must be genuine.
If the agreement was signed prior to your name change then your original name must be on it.

[robkeleuk]

Re: Lowell chasing a default from May 2009

Thank you Nemesis for your response. I've been away for a couple days and it is a pleasure to see that someone has given some ideas to take this further.

I will send a letter to Lowell asking for the full T&C . It seems that at the moment I have received only a page of a Currys Superstore ''Fixed-Sum Loan Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974''. This was followed by some page Terms and Conditions which at the bottom interestingly says a sequence of numbers and Customer Copy 3 of 4 .

Al so I have a copy of a double side single page of HSBC statement which gives the sequence from Dec 07 till 30 Jul where the last entry is of the Transfer Fee to Balance which is -105.00 and not sure what are they for.

There are no other documents or material amendments to the Ts&C's during the life of agreement.

Whilst the loan agreement shows the original address when the loan was taken the bank statement however mentions completely different address which was 2 years later.

Also interestingly loan agreement states that sum of £50 would have to be served when HSBC seems to have charged £105 at the transfer fees to balance. Does that mean that T&S of loan have changed by they failed providing the copy of this?

[nemesis45]

Re: Lowell chasing a default from May 2009

In the letter to Lowell just tell them that the "reconstituted " agreement is rejected as you believe it is incomplete, don't elaborate further.

[robkeleuk]

Re: Lowell chasing a default from May 2009

Thank you Nemesis! That is brilliant, can't believe slipped my mind! As they say - keep all the cards to yourself

[nemesis45]

Re: Lowell chasing a default from May 2009

Thank you Nemesis! That is brilliant, can't believe slipped my mind! As they say - keep all the cards to yourself

Happy to help!!:tinysmile_twink_t2:

[robkeleuk]

Re: Lowell chasing a default from May 2009

Happy to help!!:tinysmile_twink_t2:

Many thanks indeed!

Will update the thread once some movement will be seen again.

[nemesis45]

Re: Lowell chasing a default from May 2009

:thumb:.

nem

[robkeleuk]

Re: Lowell chasing a default from May 2009

:thumb:.

nem

Hi,

I'm back again... A delayed post as quite a few issues stood in the way and I also need to learn bring these things quicker than I am at the moment.

Start of February I have received a response from Lowell thanking me for the letter and noting my comments. They say that they sent me the requested information to comply with my request for information made under section 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 .

They carry on stating that they have provided me with a copy of the signed agreement for the account together with detailed statements to show how the outstanding balance was accrued.

Apparently it is since April 2007 that the court has discretion to decide whether any amount is properly payable taking into account all circumstances of how the debt accrued and whether the agreement was improperly executed.

They say that Lowell has purchased this debt in good faith from HFC Bank Ltd whose records indicate that this debt is properly payable. Lowell claim that they have not received any indication from me if the debt claimed is denied and can confirm that they are comfortable with the fact that the documentation provided is sufficient to ensure that they have complied with the request under the provisions of the Consumer Credit Act.

According to them on the basis that they have provided me with evidence that this debt is outstanding and belongs to me they should be grateful if I would contact them by telephone to discuss they ways in which I intend to repay this account which are affordable to me.


I haven't responded to them yet and about 10 days l;ayer I have received a second letter form them saying that following their recent correspondence they still haven't heard anything from me and I should call them or email them should I have any other questions.

If they however answered my questions then I should call them or email to arrange affordable repayment plan to suit my current circumstances.


Any ideas should i resend my previous letter stating that the "reconstituted " agreement is rejected as I believe it is incomplete and should I request them to send a full agreement? Keeping in mind this is due to reach 6 years in May is it worthy coming to some sort of agreement or are they fishing empty waters here?

[MIKE770]

Re: Lowell chasing a default from May 2009

pre 2007 agreements not, after 2007 yes:-:-

Apparently it is since April 2007 that the court has discretion to decide whether any amount is properly payable taking into account all circumstances of how the debt accrued and whether the agreement was improperly executed, others will no doubt comment?

[nemesis45]

Re: Lowell chasing a default from May 2009

Hi Rob,
I think we need to see all the documents Lowell have supplied, can you post them up here, remove your name address and any account numbers please.

nem

[robkeleuk]

Re: Lowell chasing a default from May 2009

Hi Rob,
I think we need to see all the documents Lowell have supplied, can you post them up here, remove your name address and any account numbers please.

nem

No worries,

I will scan them tonight and will post online.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Lowell chasing a default from May 2009

pre 2007 agreements not, after 2007 yes:-:-

Apparently it is since April 2007 that the court has discretion to decide whether any amount is properly payable taking into account all circumstances of how the debt accrued and whether the agreement was improperly executed, others will no doubt comment?

Start of February I have received a response from Lowell thanking me for the letter and noting my comments. They say that they sent me the requested information to comply with my request for information made under section 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 .

They carry on stating that they have provided me with a copy of the signed agreement for the account together with detailed statements to show how the outstanding balance was accrued.

Apparently it is since April 2007 that the court has discretion to decide whether any amount is properly payable taking into account all circumstances of how the debt accrued and whether the agreement was improperly executed.

This refers to the date when you initially opened the account, if after April 6th 2007 then the court does have discretion to enforce the debt even if there wasn't a properly executed agreement to start with. If before that date, the court is prevented from enforcing without such an agreement due to s.127 of the CCA which was repealed with effect from that date.

(3) The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a) (signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner).

They say that Lowell has purchased this debt in good faith from HFC Bank Ltd whose records indicate that this debt is properly payable. Lowell claim that they have not received any indication from me if the debt claimed is denied and can confirm that they are comfortable with the fact that the documentation provided is sufficient to ensure that they have complied with the request under the provisions of the Consumer Credit Act.

According to them on the basis that they have provided me with evidence that this debt is outstanding and belongs to me they should be grateful if I would contact them by telephone to discuss they ways in which I intend to repay this account which are affordable to me.

I haven't responded to them yet and about 10 days l;ayer I have received a second letter form them saying that following their recent correspondence they still haven't heard anything from me and I should call them or email them should I have any other questions.

If they however answered my questions then I should call them or email to arrange affordable repayment plan to suit my current circumstances.

Nothing new there, just the usual :blah: :blah: :blah:

Any ideas should i resend my previous letter stating that the "reconstituted " agreement is rejected as I believe it is incomplete and should I request them to send a full agreement? Keeping in mind this is due to reach 6 years in May is it worthy coming to some sort of agreement or are they fishing empty waters here?

I don't think it would be wise at this stage, any repayment offer would constitute acknowledgment of the debt and reset the clock. :clock: You wouldn't want to be doing that with just a few months to go. :scared: :scared:

The wording you've quoted above does not sound threatening in any way, which suggests they may well now the account wouldn't be enforceable. As others have said, it would be good to see what they've sent you before you respond with anything. :typing:

[robkeleuk]

Re: Lowell chasing a default from May 2009

Thank you guys for the responses,

Been really helpful here. I have scanned couple of letters that I found yesterday evening before dashing to work. There are few more of a similar text and let me know if should upload them as well. Also there were some letters before CCA request where they offered up to 50% discount on the default sum.

I have mentioned this previously but will repeat myself again - after sending my CCA request in May I have received a response in June which said that HSBC can not locate my original credit agreement and therefore Lowell will not contact me again unless documents are found. Their further communication started in August where they explained that credit agreement was found and they sent me the copies of it (which I do believe are not full).

[robkeleuk]

Re: Lowell chasing a default from May 2009

And the last letter which was received just over a week-two weeks ago.

[MIKE770]

Re: Lowell chasing a default from May 2009

Thank you guys for the responses,

Been really helpful here. I have scanned couple of letters that I found yesterday evening before dashing to work. There are few more of a similar text and let me know if should upload them as well. Also there were some letters before CCA request where they offered up to 50% discount on the default sum.

I have mentioned this previously but will repeat myself again - after sending my CCA request in May I have received a response in June which said that HSBC can not locate my original credit agreement and therefore Lowell will not contact me again unless documents are found. Their further communication started in August where they explained that credit agreement was found and they sent me the copies of it (which I do believe are not full).

Have I missed the so called agreement??? that HSBC stated they have not got within lowells letters? they do play stupid buggers