Lowell CCA advice please

[cjtaylor09s6]

Hi all,

Been reading over this forum with interest recently as seen there are a lot of posts re CCA docs and specifically Lowell, which is my exact scenario.

Where I'm currently at with this is a bit nuanced though, hence the post/advice required please:

I have a legacy debt of £2500 with Vanquis - taken out 2010 and defaulted 2014.. now with Lowell (and has been since Default).

Last payment made to Lowell in Nov 2022 - hence its not SB.

I've asked Lowell for the CCA and they provided a copy of Vanquis generic terms - presumably from the point of entering my agreement as it has Vanquis' former address - appears they moved in 2011...

Despite this, I am not mentioned as the Debtor nor is my (old/then) address present in the agreement, although it does feature my 'signature' - basically my name stated at the foot of the document and the date I took out the card..

I've gone back to Lowell to state it is invalid as no mention of the required detail (above) or statement of account etc.

They've today replied confirming my (correct) address at the start of the agreement but only within the email I.e. still no acceptable agreement. They have though notified me they have passed to the relevant in-house team and more will follow in due course.

Grateful if those more in the know could enlighten me on where I stand currently in receiving an acceptable CCA / what could be deemed as meeting the ask in what may follow?

As is often the case, not attempting to dodge this - just want to be clear its enforceable.

Thank you!

[echat11]

Hi CJ

Welcome to LB

They can reconstruct the agreement from various sources.

But from what you say they have just sent generic Terms and Conditions.

Although an email sent has the correct address.

As it stands they haven't complied with your request.

Remember, just because they send you documentation, doesn't make it compliant, you need to check it for the correct details, does it 'add up'.

https://lawzone.legal/when-is-a-cred...0unenforceable.

https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/hand...ate=2017-03-07

[cjtaylor09s6]

Thank you EC! That's extremely helpful and I'll await with interest/ bear in mind the links posted, as to where this goes next..

I also have another acct on hold with them - ex-Cap 1 - similar amount but opened 2004 (but also Defaulted in 2014)..

Given the time frame with this one, appreciate there may be more to consider with it being pre-2007 which I mull over idc.. Indeed, Lowell have been quite evasive when I've probbed here, maybe suggesting this is more problematic for them..

Similarly, they've offered significant discounts for both - 70%, within the last year, so would appear there's plenty in my favour currently..

But as above, just need to see where I stand / what they produce etc.

Thanks again

[cjtaylor09s6]

echat11

Hi, I've had an update from Lowell recently in terms of these accounts:

Vanquis - other than providing the Statement of Account I asked for (since Feb), the CCA doc remains as per previously provided hence request not met...

Cap One:

This is more positive (for them - not me!) - in that the following has now been provided to me:

* Application form - completed and signed by myself (actual signature as this is pre-2007), at my address at the time and correct date of application made.
* Credit agreement - with all requisite terms BUT not specifically signed, NOR, is my name/address quoted in the agreement..

* Copy of Default Notice
* Statement of Account (for entirety that it was live)..

Please could you confirm my understanding that this second acct is now enforceable or am I missing a required/essential detail before I engage please?

Thank you again and much appreciated.

[cjtaylor09s6]

I should have added that the credit agreement/terms is a general one and NOT specific to my account/agreement if this makes a crucial difference..

My only signature is on the App form and my address is on the App form AND a covering sheet re the generic terms sent to me..

Neither my address or signature is on a personalised / specific version of the credit agreement..

[echat11]

echat11

Hi, I've had an update from Lowell recently in terms of these accounts:

Vanquis - other than providing the Statement of Account I asked for (since Feb), the CCA doc remains as per previously provided hence request not met...

Cap One:

This is more positive (for them - not me!) - in that the following has now been provided to me:

* Application form - completed and signed by myself (actual signature as this is pre-2007), at my address at the time and correct date of application made.
* Credit agreement - with all requisite terms BUT not specifically signed, NOR, is my name/address quoted in the agreement..

* Copy of Default Notice
* Statement of Account (for entirety that it was live)..

Please could you confirm my understanding that this second acct is now enforceable or am I missing a required/essential detail before I engage please?

Thank you again and much appreciated.

You need to go through everything.

Account 1, they need a CCA, Default Notice and Letter of Assignment.

If the Terms are 'varied' they need to provide Terms and Conditions for the 'variation' i.e. if the interest rate has gone up etc.
A Default Notice and Letter of Assignment are needed if they want to take the matter to Court.

Account 2, they need a CCA, Default Notice and Letter of Assignment.

They need to provide a Letter of Assignment and If the Terms are 'varied' they need to provide Terms and Conditions for the 'variation' i.e. if the interest rate has gone up etc.

[echat11]

I should have added that the credit agreement/terms is a general one and NOT specific to my account/agreement if this makes a crucial difference..

My only signature is on the App form and my address is on the App form AND a covering sheet re the generic terms sent to me..

Neither my address or signature is on a personalised / specific version of the credit agreement..

Generic Terms I believe would be non compliant, they could be from a different year.
They normally have a reference number on the top / bottom / side. An application form is meaningless.

[cjtaylor09s6]

echat11

Thank you again for all your help - I was wavering with the Cap One account earlier but on further review from your comments, the terms on the App form are inconsistent with those stated on the CCA, hence its definitely generic..

Obviously I won't take this advice as bullet proof, but it strengthens my hand / equals it with the Vanquis acct which I was already satisfied was non-compliant.

Best wishes.

[cjtaylor09s6]

echat11

Good evening,

Just a quick update on this one if I may please;

So I went back to Lowell on both accounts to advise request not fulfilled / is unsatisfactory (as following your advice / a more detailed review from my end, I'm near convinced to this effect..).

They responded last week to state "we consider the documentation provided as sufficient evidence of liability" and suggested I do a SAR (to the original creditors..). And they suggested a 14 day hold.

I queried their grounds of "sufficient liability" (as what they deem by this doesn't to my mind equate to what is legally enforceable). I requested an indefinite hold whilst I explore 'further options' (i.e FOS, OFT etc). I've not confirmed I'll make a SAR request..


They've come back to me this morning to confirm that "whilst we are unable to agree on validity, we are happy to rely on these (documents provided) and will not be approaching the original companies for additional documents".

They are also (unsurprisingly) against an indefinite hold but will agree to 30 days.

What would you do next in this scenario may I ask please?

It is now becoming increasingly clear to me that they do not possess what is required (nor is what has been provided is sufficient to represent a valid 'reconstituted' agreement - from your previous advice (thank you)). I'm also doubtful that either original creditor holds what is required (or they would have furnished it to Lowell).

Thank you again.

[echat11]

You've made your position clear, that the documents provided are 'non-compliant', so 'unenforceable'.
You really don't need to do anything more (see what their next move is), if they believe they have enough,
they will start proceedings. You defend the claim.

There's other documentation they need to provide, Default Notice, Letter of Assignment, Statement of
Account etc.

No doubt before that, they may send more discounted offer letters.

Hold off on the SAR, you may need to do it at some point.

Has the 'generic T's and C's got any reference numbers, top, side or bottom of page?

Update the thread if you get any correspondence.

[cjtaylor09s6]

echat11

Excellent and thank you, really appreciate your further insight.

For completeness, where I referred to Default Notice on my first post of 07/08, this is actually just a covering sheet titled 'Defaulted Agreement' and not the official doc - hence no DN or LoA for either account..

"Has the 'generic T's and C's got any reference numbers, top, side or bottom of page?"

No - again for both accounts. I checked this out following your previous advice on this point.

Finally for now, there are clear inconsistencies with the rates offered in the application form vs the terms provided (from generic t&c's doc) - indicating as you previously advised, maybe are from a different year (or time frame at least). Just wanted to add a bit more context to my additional post on 07/08.

Sure, I'll update the thread with anything further received in due course but will dig heels in now as suggested

[cjtaylor09s6]

echat11

Quick update re the above:

Persistent contact from Lowell - letters, emails and calls - all just revival attempts at payment - no discounts offered but no court action proposed either (vagueness of "next steps" etc.).

They just keep towing the rhetoric that accounts are not statute barred etc (and I have never disputed this) - so all a deflection tactic / non-acknowledgment re the issue raised).

They haven't got the docs that are required - and neither has Cap 1 / Vanquis - otherwise they would have furnished them to Lowell.

As you advised, SAR not explored as onus still on them!

Compliments of the season!

[echat11]

echat11

Quick update re the above:

Persistent contact from Lowell - letters, emails and calls - all just revival attempts at payment - no discounts offered but no court action proposed either (vagueness of "next steps" etc.).

They just keep towing the rhetoric that accounts are not statute barred etc (and I have never disputed this) - so all a deflection tactic / non-acknowledgment re the issue raised).

They haven't got the docs that are required - and neither has Cap 1 / Vanquis - otherwise they would have furnished them to Lowell.

As you advised, SAR not explored as onus still on them!

Compliments of the season!

Update if you get anything 'meaningful'.

You too.