Consumer Debt

[pineway]

Hi, i am working on a case at the moment and come across something


Very interesting regarding consumer debt.

As people may be aware that Banks often sell consumer debts onto other companies such as unpaid loans, bank accounts etc.

Now I have been working on this all week and ripping my hair out as it’s still not very clear on what the options are.

There is a personal debt with Barclays Bank of which sold the debt to a company called Lowell Group.

Lowell has confirmed they have purchased the debt of £18,00 from Barclays in 2005 and have only just informed me of doing so.

Now after doing some research, it appears they are only licensed to do the below

Registration Number: Z8222569

The tracing of consumer and commercial debtors and the collection on behalf of creditors. The purchasing of trade debts, including rentals and instalment credit payments, from business.


Now it does not mention purchasing of consumer debts, and this now as me thinking…..if they are not licensed then both Barclays (for allowing, and Lowell for Purchasing ) have acted illegally.

And if my understanding is correct, this means the debt is now considered legally (not recoverable)


Can anyone on here confirm this?


Regards

Dave

[Jenni@FarrantFrost]

I dont know,but it certainly looks promising.
I have seen dealings with Lowell before, for Barclays and HSBC personal loan debts.

Their first solicitors letter IMO isn't from a real solicitors, it's just another branch of their office.
The particular debt I am thinking of (I've seen Lowell a few times) was already about 3 years old. The man who owed the money, under advice, ignored Lowell's letters, even the court threats, and they never ever acted on them. To my knowledge, his 6 years [after which with no contact a debt is unrecoverable] will expire at some point in 2008 and Lowell will have achieved zero.

This does not constitute advice but if the debt was from 2005, and the person owing the money has not responded to the recent Lowell letter, I expect the debt will be unrecoverable anyway, due to the parallels with the case I outlined above.

I will be following this thread with great interest ;)

[pineway]

To make this topic even more interesting, I have sent Lowell a Reqest as below

Please send me all data that your company holds relating to my entire account history. Please include details of all transactions, and a copy of the original contract by which this account is/was governed at the time it was opened including all amendments made to the contract terms since opening the account.
I would also like a schedule of all charges & interest applied to my account(s) including details of any instances that required manual intervention. If you are unable to provide this specific information, copy statements will suffice.

now since they have purchased the debt

I may have them under the below

(1) The illegal purchase of a consumer debt when not licensed to do so.
(2) Failing to produce the contract that the debt is governed by

So in theory option 1 or 2 could easily result in the debt being non-recoverable as it will make it very hard for Lowell to provide the contract and even if they did, they may come into problems with option 1.

its a very gray area in the law as i see this and its not clear.

I will be contacting the Information Commissioner's Office tomorrow with regards to option 1 to see if i have a case.

Regards

Dave

[consultant]

If that is the company classification, from Companies House, that is only a category for statistics - I dont think it is a legal undertaking that it is all they will ever do.

[pineway]

No, this is not information from Companies house but that from Information Commissioner's Office.

http://www.ico.gov.uk/ESDWebPages/DoSearch.asp?reg=3585851

regards

Dave

[Moneyline]

Dave,

First thing you need to do is send them a s78 letter asking for a true copy of the original credit agreement.

They then have to send you this within 12 days. If they do not the account is in dispute and you do not have to make any further payments, they cannot chase you for payments and no interest can be charged.

After 30 days, if no copy, it becomes a criminal offence.

The chances are, they do not have the agreement, and if they send you what they say is the agreement, I am positive it will not comply with the prescribed terms needed to satisfy the CCA 1974.

If you want a s78 letter, let me know and I will post one on here. You also need to ask them for a copy of the deed of assignment.
There is an excellent chance this debt is unenforceable.

Regards,
Tony

[pineway]

Hi, If you could please Tony.

Regards

Dave

[maxine]

Hi Dave,

This is interesting and I will be watching this thread with interest too :)

Have you contacted OFT regards the terms of the license as I thought it was down to them to ensure the company complies with the terms of the license. This includes compliance with their codes of practise regarding the letters they send out which may disguise themselves as solicitors and disclose certain particulars.

Also, another avenue for you would be the FOS as of April 2007 there are reformed consumer dispute channels (Consumer Credit Act 2006) so may be worth contacting them. As part of the reforms the automatic enforceability is also abolished but dont know if this only applies to agreements where the term would have taken it to 2008. More info on the BERR website http://www.berr.gov.uk/consumers/consumer-finance/credit-act-2006/Timetable/page29768.html

Keep us posted wont you?

Regards
Maxine

[pineway]

I have already served a demand on the Lowell Group to provide me with information under the Data Protection Act and given them 40 days to reply.

I actually wish I had not sent that demand now in view of my new idea about going down the (Unlicensed to purchase consumer debt) route.

What gave me the idea about doing this?

Well I received a letter about an account I forgot about with Barclays back in 2005 and upon receiving the letter from Lowell requesting payment, I automatically thought, Oh Barclays they the ones who changed me around £1000 worth of bank charges. Let’s look into them and see if they can be reclaimed.

So I started digging deeper at which time I discovered the purchase of the debt from Barclays by Lowell may be unlawful.

Its actually a eye opener when you start to look into this and it makes you think if one bank may have acted illegally (in more then one way) then what have the others done in the past!!

Its interesting that banks like sending letters out to people and when you really look into the cases, all our banks are not being totally honest and upfront with there customers.

It’s about time customers start giving them a hard time once they step a foot wrong.

Regards

Dave

[Moneyline]

Dave,

Below is a s78 letter fro you. One to be sent to then original creditor and one to the Debt coll. Company.

If it is a loan, change the s78 in the letter to s77. If it is a running credit account use the s78.

After 12 days they do not send you the correct info, the debt is in dispute and no payments have to be made, also they cannot demand payment.
If they do send you what they deem is a CCA then use the following to ascertain whether it is enforceable or not.

CCA1974
CCA 2006
To see if the required prescribed terms are present.
If they threaten court action at any time, you can then send a letter under CPR4.6 which has more importance legally for them to comply.
You cannot complain to the OFT it is consumer direct, and I can tell you they are uselless. You would be wasting your time.
The FOS will do nothing until you get a letter from the creditor saying that they have given you their final decision.





Creditors Name & Address





Re: Account :



I do not acknowledge ANY debt to your company. I require you to supply the following documentation before I will communicate further on this matter.

1. You must supply me with a true and signed copy of the alleged agreement you refer to. This is my right under your obligation to supply a copy of the agreement under the legislation contained within s.78 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 your obligation also extends to providing a statement of account. I enclose £1.00 in payment of the statutory fee,

2. If this debt has been sold by you (eg to a debt collection agency), please supply me with a signed true copy of the deed of assignment of the above referenced agreement that you allege exists.

3. You are notified that you are obliged to supply these documents, whether you are the original creditor or not under S189 of the CCA 1974.

4. Non-compliance with my request after 30 days is a criminal offence under the above Act and will result in a report being submitted to the relevant statutory authorities.

5. As you are aware, a credit agreement that is not properly documented and signed by the customer is totally unenforceable under the CCA and therefore is a complete defence to any court claim that is issued.

6. Furthermore you are reminded that under s78 sub section (6) whilst the default continues you are not entitled to enforce the agreement in law.


Yours Faithfully

[Moneyline]

Hi Dave,

This is interesting and I will be watching this thread with interest too :)

Have you contacted OFT regards the terms of the license as I thought it was down to them to ensure the company complies with the terms of the license. This includes compliance with their codes of practise regarding the letters they send out which may disguise themselves as solicitors and disclose certain particulars.

Also, another avenue for you would be the FOS as of April 2007 there are reformed consumer dispute channels (Consumer Credit Act 2006) so may be worth contacting them. As part of the reforms the automatic enforceability is also abolished but dont know if this only applies to agreements where the term would have taken it to 2008. More info on the BERR website http://www.berr.gov.uk/consumers/consumer-finance/credit-act-2006/Timetable/page29768.html

Keep us posted wont you?

Regards
Maxine

Maxine,

The biggest reform of the 2006 Act ( and the biggest kick in the teeth for consumers) is repealling the s172 of the CCA 1974.
If any CCA did not contain the prescribed terms, it was unenforceable and nothing could be done about it.. The 2006 act changed this, in the effect that it is not automatically unenforceable, only a court can decide. However, most debt collectors will not choose this route as they normally only pay 10p in the pound for the debt, so they usually don't bother if they feel it will fail in court.

This only applies to CCA's after April 2007 though, the Act could not be backdated to previous agreements.

[pineway]

Lowal Group have now confirmed the account is in dispute and have put a hold on the account.

They have confirmed they have requested from Barclays Bank a copy of the Agreement and account statements going back 6 years.

They where trying to offer me a deal of 50% off the original debt on the terms of payment for the full amount of the remaining 50%

I declined and said, at this moment in time, i am not sure what amounts are in dispute and therefore cant comment until i have received the statements.

They put the phone down

Regards

Dave

[Jenni@FarrantFrost]

They put the phone down


Boy, how professional! :eek:

Thanks for the update, good luck :)

[Cred-X]

Fingers crossed they don't cross-sell the debt to another agency and you have to repeat the process all over again.

[Moneyline]

Dave,

You should really sned thta letter regardless of what they say they are going to send you.
The letter is a legal reuqirement under s78 of the CCA. If you don't send it, they can argue that you haven't asked them under that section and can send you anything and it could come back and bite your bum. Once they send you anything under s78, they cannot change it. So, lets say they send you an application form, you tell them it's unenforceable under CCA1974. They will play about with you forever, becasue you haven't sent them a letter asking for it. For the sake of £1.00 you will be in a much beter position.

You see, there is a second letter you send if they do not comply, and it's this second letter that shafts them. Do not beleive any5thing you are told on the phone by a debt collector, thye will deny it if it suits them and you have no comeback. Do not talk to them, ask them to put everything in writing.
This is our job Dave, we know these people.:)

[Sarum Associates]

If anyone has an interest in this thread, they should really head over to the consumeractiongroup.co.uk
There are literally hundreds of thread and posts on the subject.
It is amazing how little power these bullies have. If you take the time to learn the process and law for dealing with them, it's not difficult to beat them...as long as you are strong! - They are bullies and they rely on consumers being scared of them. They have no legal power. Most of their debts are not even 'purchased' legally.

[pineway]

Hi,

I have started another topic regarding a more Serious DCA contacting me.

This is more intreasting then Lowell

You can see the topic at http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/130275-hfo-services-limited.html

I have involved

The Police, Courts, OFT, and soon BBC

Regards

Dave

Any comments on this topic do not reflect that of Pineway Technologies Limited but that of a Personal view only

[Moneyline]

Looking on your site previously, I see you are involved in debt collection (or debt advising) Is this for a customer or for yourself?

[pineway]

Hi Moneyline

No, its not a client i am working on at the moment, but that of a personal issue with Lowell and HFO Services. (The Top two worse DCAs)

Been ad by a Monstor, and are in the process of nailing that monstor to the ground.

Pineway do offer such services as you noticed. But only provides a service to businesses that have unpaid invoices etc.

Regards

Dave

[maxine]

Hi Dave,

I read the link you posted. I sympathise with your harrassment claim however there is still a valid claim for payment of the debt as the payments were only missed due to falling on hard times temporarily with redundancy is there not?

Regards
Maxine

[pineway]

Hi

Correct, but i will then ask for the charges to be refunded that was put on the account that are unfair which will lower the debt by over £1000, once this is agreed. I would make full payment to clear the remaining balance.

Regards

Dave

[Moneyline]

Hi

Correct, but i will then ask for the charges to be refunded that was put on the account that are unfair which will lower the debt by over £1000, once this is agreed. I would make full payment to clear the remaining balance.

Regards

Dave

Dave,

You would not have to pay anyhing at all if the CCA is unenforceable.

Thousands of people are paying back these debts when, under consumer law, they don,t have to.
I understand there is also a moral point of view that, if you have had the gOods, then you should pay back the debt. That's fine, but we have found 70-75% OF CREDIT agreements are unenforceable, and more people should realise this , then at least they have the option of canceling the debt if they so wish.
You have seen how nasty these people can get, we owe them no loyalty whatsoever.

[Tungstone]

However, most debt collectors will not choose this route as they normally only pay 10p in the pound for the debt, so they usually don't bother if they feel it will fail in court.

Kindly would you mind explaining and assisting me with the following question:

Would a Debt Collection Agency like iGOR for instance, be purchasing the debt?, or are they collecting on behalf of the creditor?

The Route is as follows:

Customer purchasers from X
X provides a Buy Now Pay Later policy
Customer Contracts with Y for Finance

Before the end of 12 months Customer sends off payment to Y for the full amount
Y denies receipt of the cheque
Customer sends another cheque, Y returns the cheque to Customer , cheque was for the full amount
Y says its now over 12 months, interest kicks in, and customer must pay monthly instalments of "**** " per month

Customer refuses to pay extortionate monthly payments

Y passes "debt" to Z

Z pursuing debt

The debt has escalated from £1800.00 to £5000.00 in under a year
=========================================

[Moneyline]

Why did Y retuirn the cheque?

Was it sent by a traceable method at first?

It's highly unlikely at this stage that z has bought the debt. They will have just been assigned to collect.

Write a letter back to z to tell them not to contact you any more, you are dealing with Y directly. A third party has no legal standing in this contract.
If they continue to contact you, tell them you will report them under S40 of the Justice of Administration Act 1970.

[Moneyline]

Sorry,

Full of flu today, head not working properly. Ignore my last post. Why did Y send the cheque back?
Was the 1st cheque sent by a traceable method?

Contact the Debt company and tell them not to call again you are dealing with y directly. If they continue to call or write send the letter below:
Dear Sirs

I am of the view that your continued harassment of me by telephone puts you in breach of Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, and the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

If you continue to harass me by telephone, you will also be in breach of the Wireless Telegraphy Act (1949) and I will report you to both Trading Standards and The Office of Fair Trading, meaning that you will be liable to a substantial fine.


In case you are not aware of the laws in question you may wish to study the following:

1 ) Communications Act 2003, Section 127

2 ) Human Rights Act 1990, Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life

3 ) Administration of Justice Act 1970, Section 40 onwards

4 ) Wireless Telegraphy Act 1949, misuse


With this in mind I feel it fair to advise you of the following:

a ) I shall be keeping a diary of telephone calls from this point onwards.

b ) Telephone calls to my private and mobile numbers will be recorded, and recordings will be used in any action taken.

c ) Telephone calls to my place of work will be ignored, but recorded in the diary.

To reiterate, I am officially informing you that I will only deal with * * * * * in writing and wish all telephone calls to stop immediately. All future correspondence from * * * * * (for any reason whatsoever) must be made in writing.

I trust that I have made myself understood on this matter

[Tungstone]

Why did Y retuirn the cheque?

Was it sent by a traceable method at first?

It's highly unlikely at this stage that z has bought the debt. They will have just been assigned to collect.

Write a letter back to z to tell them not to contact you any more, you are dealing with Y directly. A third party has no legal standing in this contract.
If they continue to contact you, tell them you will report them under S40 of the Justice of Administration Act 1970.

The Debt Collection Agency has inundated the Debtor with repeated harassment, almost threatening, and continual.( telephone calls)

Despite being appraised that debtpr is represented by Legal Representation, the calls continue.

The haraasmenmt to the extent that debtor is now ill with anxiety , and spouse suffering heart problems

Thank you for pointing out the relevant Statutes........Will look at them later

[pineway]

http://www.benwell.clara.co.uk/Hfo-court.JPG

[pineway]

Would this not be in breach of the data protection act.

how can they keep passing details to other companies, eg my date of birth etc.

does this not count for the level of frauld this country gets

Fingers crossed they don't cross-sell the debt to another agency and you have to repeat the process all over again.

[Jenni@FarrantFrost]

Would this not be in breach of the data protection act.

how can they keep passing details to other companies, eg my date of birth etc.




That's a very good question indeed.... :|