Littlewoods - Lowells - Fredericksons

[marypoppins]

Re: Lowells - Statutory Demand?

Thank you planB, I thought that might be the case.

It's dated 4th March, I received it last Thursday but I've been away for a long weekend so couldn't have a proper look at it until this evening.

[PlanB]

Re: Lowells - Statutory Demand?

It's dated 4th March, I received it last Thursday but I've been away for a long weekend so couldn't have a proper look at it until this evening.

That's fine. Going by that you've got until 18th March to respond.

Here's a letter which TTC was directed to send to Bryan Carter because he (TTC) is in a similar situation. It may/may not be relevant to your particular situation. I need to read back through this thread which I will do in the next couple of days. Try not to worry.

Letter before action letter

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Lowells - Statutory Demand?

Report the Bowells Group to Trading Standards.

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Lowells - Statutory Demand?

That's fine. Going by that you've got until 18th March to respond.

Here's a letter which TTC was directed to send to Bryan Carter because he (TTC) is in a similar situation. It may/may not be relevant to your particular situation.

One obvious difference is that the CCA request should refer to section 78 rather than 77.

Bwyan Carter seems to be working under the delusion that the reconstituted "twue copy" of the agreement - perhaps compiled from scraps found lining the office cat's litter tray - satisfies the s78 request, despite a previous statement that it does not and that the agreement is unenforceable.

[marypoppins]

Re: Lowells - Statutory Demand?

Carters definitely need to be stopped in their tracks, I'm guessing/hoping that they are not aware that I hold written confirmation from BC that it's unenforceable (see post 28) due to being unable to comply with my s78 request, which I sent to Lowells in Feb last year, so the letter in the link you posted will probably suffice but will wait for further advice from you.

I'll get my file out tomorrow when I'm home from work and go through it to see what I've had and re-familiarise myself.

[marypoppins]

Re: Lowells - Statutory Demand?

One obvious difference is that the CCA request should refer to section 78 rather than 77.

Bwyan Carter seems to be working under the delusion that the reconstituted "twue copy" of the agreement - perhaps compiled from scraps found lining the office cat's litter tray - satisfies the s78 request, despite a previous statement that it does not and that the agreement is unenforceable.

I didn't notice that when I read though it but I think the odd typo is there to keep us on our toes and ensures that we check everything thoroughly before posting!

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Lowells - Statutory Demand?

Carters definitely need to be stopped in their tracks, I'm guessing/hoping that they are not aware that I hold written confirmation from BC that it's unenforceable (see post 28) due to being unable to comply with my s78 request, which I sent to Lowells in Feb last year,

They damn well ought to be, as Freds is part of the Bowells Group.

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Lowells - Statutory Demand?

I didn't notice that when I read though it but I think the odd typo is there to keep us on our toes and ensures that we check everything thoroughly before posting!

It wasn't a typo - it is how I refer (or wefer) to "true copies" of agreements which, of course, are not "true copies" at all.

[PlanB]

Re: Lowells - Statutory Demand?

Carters definitely need to be stopped in their tracks, I'm guessing/hoping that they are not aware that I hold written confirmation from BC that it's unenforceable (see post 28) due to being unable to comply with my s78 request, which I sent to Lowells in Feb last year, so the letter in the link you posted will probably suffice .

I've had a quick look back through your thread because the title scares me. Having said that this letter from Bryan Carter is pretty standard and you may go with Niddy's suggestion in post # 42 since you've got a letter from BC admitting the account is unenforceable. Bryan Carter won't know that unless you tell them which should make them back off instantly. Maybe save the LBA response for when/if they persist.

Usually we say copy the letter confirming there's no agreement and send a copy with this --> http://www.all-about-debt.co.uk/old/...firming-no-cca

Your BC letter is a gem. I hope Bryan Carter enjoys reading it

they add in the letter, the following paragraph.

"We are currently unable to provide a copy of the credit agreement you entered into. We accept that we are therefore prevented from enforcing our agreement with you while this state of affairs continues".

[PlanB]

Re: Lowells - Statutory Demand?

Can someone on the team please change the title to 'Littlewoods - Lowells - Fredericksons' ?

I'm sure that can be arranged, but as long as you have the words "statutory demand" in the title you can count on me noticing your thread whenever it pops up on the list

[Deepie]

Re: Littlewoods - Lowells - Fredericksons

Littlewoods - Lowells - Fredericksons

Done

[marypoppins]

Re: Littlewoods - Lowells - Fredericksons

I've had a quick look back through your thread because the title scares me. Having said that this letter from Bryan Carter is pretty standard and you may go with Niddy's suggestion in post # 42 since you've got a letter from BC admitting the account is unenforceable. Bryan Carter won't know that unless you tell them which should make them back off instantly. Maybe save the LBA response for when/if they persist.

Thanks PlanB, would it be better to send the same letter as the one I sent to Freds (from post 42) or just a brief letter to Bryan Carter enclosing a copy of both my letter to Freds (from post 42) and the BC letter confirming unenforceable and see how they respond? I will highlight the specific paragraph in the BC letter, just in case they miss it like Freds appeared to have done.

Your BC letter is a gem. I hope Bryan Carter enjoys reading it

I consider myself very lucky to receive this, It's the first time I've seen BC admit unenforceability.

I'm sure that can be arranged, but as long as you have the words "statutory demand" in the title you can count on me noticing your thread whenever it pops up on the list

Deepie has changed the title for me now as Lowells didn't issue an SD and it makes it easier for me to find my thread but I know where to find you, should I need urgent help!

[PlanB]

Re: Littlewoods - Lowells - Fredericksons

I would send the letter Niddy suggested (in post # 24) to Bryan Carter. It's a good letter which quotes case law so BC will see that you're clued up and are getting advice from somewhere. Attach the Barclaycard 'confession' letter to that.

Freds clearly didn't read that letter when you sent it to them or more likely they simply didn't understand it. Bryan Carter will do both (i.e. read and understand).

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Littlewoods - Lowells - Fredericksons

Post 42 even --> http://forums.all-about-debt.co.uk/s...l=1#post367689

[PlanB]

Re: Littlewoods - Lowells - Fredericksons

Post 42 even --> http://forums.all-about-debt.co.uk/s...l=1#post367689

Thank you for correcting my typo caused by a hangover not dyslexia