Bryan Carter, lowell and fredrickson

[chaz301975]

Re: Bryan Carter, lowell and fredrickson



https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=A51DA2BEA69186EF!492&authkey=!AG8RoLaN OcrmorI&ithint=file%2cpdf

https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resi...int=file%2cpdf

hi just a update i have receved a letter from lowel as a reponce to my letter if i could have some advice/help on my next step i was expecting a bit more info from vanquis/lowel have they sent all that i need

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Bryan Carter, lowell and fredrickson

https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=A51DA2BEA69186EF!492&authkey=!AG8RoLaN OcrmorI&ithint=file%2cpdf

https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resi...int=file%2cpdf
[ATTACH=CONFIG]15070[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]15071[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]15072[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]15073[/ATTACH]
hi just a update i have receved a letter from lowel as a reponce to my letter if i could have some advice/help on my next step i was expecting a bit more info from vanquis/lowel have they sent all that i need

All the terms seem to be there, even when items 1 to 3.6 are out of sequence, because this was clearly a booklet. The other file are statements and you've got the screens with your application details, what more information were you expecting?

As this is an online application from 2009, it would be difficult to challenge the enforceability of the account since you would have had to agree to the terms by ticking the box, in order to proceed with the application and get the card. :typing:

[MIKE770]

Re: Bryan Carter, lowell and fredrickson

MBNA internet in one picture???

[chaz301975]

Re: Bryan Carter, lowell and fredrickson

well there are some errors on there forms and with the terms first on the online form it says my income is £22000 my income that year was more like £12500 it also says i applied on the 22 but approval date was 26 if i remeber my on line form was rejected and refered to a adviser that called me at a later date and approved it over the phone.
also in the terms it has a bit that goes "on and from march 2011" section 12.6 how is that if the card was taken out in 2009
also this all started with a letter of threating court action so i was expecting at least a default notice or letter of asignment

[chaz301975]

Re: Bryan Carter, lowell and fredrickson

MBNA internet in one picture???

yer i dont understand that ether

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Bryan Carter, lowell and fredrickson

well there are some errors on there forms and with the terms first on the online form it says my income is £22000 my income that year was more like £12500 it also says i applied on the 22 but approval date was 26 if i remeber my on line form was rejected and refered to a adviser that called me at a later date and approved it over the phone.
also in the terms it has a bit that goes "on and from march 2011" section 12.6 how is that if the card was taken out in 2009

Ah, well, yes, the devil is in the detail and there are many things you can spot because you know about them. If the terms are from 2011 then they can't be the terms you agreed to in 2009 (if that date is correct).

also this all started with a letter of threating court action so i was expecting at least a default notice or letter of asignment

If the documents were sent in response to your CCA request, then they would have complied (unless those are not your original terms) without the NoA and DN, however, I've looked back and you sent the letter here: http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...332#post472332 which is a response to a legal threat and asks for those as well.

There were various reasons for responding with the letter linked above:

1. To stave off court action, by showing them that you would want to see the paperwork they'd rely on and you know your rights :grin:
2. If they still went ahead and issued a claim, at least you'd have started the process earlier rather than running against the clock when you have a deadline to submit a defence
3. To show that you complied with the pre-action conduct, which states that the defendant should reply to a letter of claim, and that it was THEM who didn't comply. Again, this could help in court if it came to that.

So far, they haven't issued a claim -even though there's a mention of one somewhere above, I believe that wasn't the case, was it? :noidea: You have complied with your part of the protocol, they haven't. :thumb:

For the moment, there's no need to respond with anything if that's all they've sent, if you hear from Lowell or anyone else about this account, do post up and then we can thing of a suitable response, for example if you don't think those details are correct then we can argue they haven't complied with your s.78 request.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Bryan Carter, lowell and fredrickson

i dont no if this is a good thing or bad thing but i got a new letter today from bryan carter.

"We refer you to your recent communication.

Please note that we are no longer instucted in connection with this matter and have returned this account to our client"

In view of the above, I reckon we have achieved what we set out to do. :clap2:

If you look around, you'll see how many claims the Dynamic Duo Lowell-cum-BC issue!

You won't find any case where they have provided any documents to support their claim and BC always refuse to supply anything and to agree to an extension. They really try to make things as difficult as possible for the defendants who often haven't even got a clue what the debt is for, yet they are taken to court with no paperwork.

The fact that they backed down without further ado speaks volumes! :HOXmasFelf007:

[BeeTB1]

Re: Bryan Carter, lowell and fredrickson

My husband is in the same situation, and I have been fighting off various DCA with success, it was when I came against Bryan Carter that I panicked a bit, legally trained myself but not in this type of litigation I have re educated myself to learn the ways of the world and what 'debt' is, and I thank you for this thread as Lowell's were sent a £1 PO but sent it back saying they had referred the matter to Fredickson etc, Vanquis themselves also confirmed that there is no hard agreement just an application form I have all the hard proof. Funny thing is I used to work at the Civil Appeals office as a manager at the Court of Appeal - if only I knew what I know now.

thank you friends. Much love and peace to you all. Bee. xxx

[chaz301975]

Re: Bryan Carter, lowell and fredrickson

hi every one thanks once again for you help i have receved more letters from lowel and would like some advice on my next step

[chaz301975]

Re: Bryan Carter, lowell and fredrickson

My husband is in the same situation, and I have been fighting off various DCA with success, it was when I came against Bryan Carter that I panicked a bit, legally trained myself but not in this type of litigation I have re educated myself to learn the ways of the world and what 'debt' is, and I thank you for this thread as Lowell's were sent a £1 PO but sent it back saying they had referred the matter to Fredickson etc, Vanquis themselves also confirmed that there is no hard agreement just an application form I have all the hard proof. Funny thing is I used to work at the Civil Appeals office as a manager at the Court of Appeal - if only I knew what I know now.

thank you friends. Much love and peace to you all. Bee. xxx

it would be nice to now how you have got on with lowel and if it is all sorted

[chaz301975]

Re: Bryan Carter, lowell and fredrickson

im thinkimg it is about time to write a new letter to lowel but just not quite sure how much to put in it as i dont think they have replied with all the info they should as the sent a letter with direct threat of court action