Walsh1's UE Diary

[Walsh1]

Re: Walsh1's UE Diary

Don't have the Default notice and they say Cap one not got a copy. They say it was dated 7 Jan 2009

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Walsh1's UE Diary

They sent a notice of sums in arrears dated 5 Dec 2008

That was a bit late.

Do Lowells know that?

(I won't tell them and I expect you won't, either.)

That would make it more reasonable for the default notice to have been sent at the start of January 2009, as Lowells stated, and for your failure to remedy the default - and for the cause of action - to be 15 days later.

I really do hope you can convince those parasites that the debt is SB.

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Walsh1's UE Diary

Don't have the Default notice and they say Cap one not got a copy. They say it was dated 7 Jan 2009

They can say that the Moon is composed of Cheddar cheese, for all anyone cares.

They'd have to prove the date of the DN - on the balance of probabilities - in court if their claim were to succeed.

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Walsh1's UE Diary

It's a pity you were not living in Scotland when you applied for the credit card...

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Walsh1's UE Diary

Walsh - just send the letter in between xmas & new year.

Don't worry about the technical elements discussed above. It's a grey area which is difficult to apply to your situation but in the main, Hart is specific to HP Agreements.

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Walsh1's UE Diary

I do concur - send the letter.

[Walsh1]

Re: Walsh1's UE Diary

Thanks for that. Looked at it last night. I think it is ambiguious. Case law seems the same. Most concur with Niddy. Thanks all will send letter and let u know. All have a great Christmas and thanks for all the help

[Walsh1]

Re: Walsh1's UE Diary

Help, had a reply from the last letter sent to Lowell. They say they have answered my query on SB. They state it is not SB as the reasons previously stated by them. They say apart from the reasons already given. Also the fact they contacted me when they purchased the debt and that was before the SB date,makes the debt legally enforceable. They state if I do not contact them within seven days to make arrangement to repay the debt that they will start legal action without further warning. Help!

[PlanB]

Re: Walsh1's UE Diary

Help, had a reply from the last letter sent to Lowell. They say they have answered my query on SB. They state it is not SB as the reasons previously stated by them. They say apart from the reasons already given. Also the fact they contacted me when they purchased the debt and that was before the SB date,makes the debt legally enforceable. They state if I do not contact them within seven days to make arrangement to repay the debt that they will start legal action without further warning. Help!

. . . . and breathe . . .

One step at a time. Which debt are you referring to? Link me to a post on your UE Diary thread detailing the history of the account in question.

Lowell often talk nonsense and twaddle about SB debts.

Having said that it looks like you've been sent a genuine LBA which needs a robust reply within a specific time frame (what is the deadline they've dictated?) such as this template letter http://www.all-about-debt.co.uk/inde...ction-response

The template letter is generic and will need tweaking to your personal circumstances so please post up as much info as possible on this thread before you send it.

PlanB x

[Walsh1]

Re: Walsh1's UE Diary

Plan B the account is
Start of Diary
August 2014

Type of Account; Capital1 credit card

Date commenced: 26/04/2004

Approx balance; £1600+

Date of last payment; 06/08/2008

No arrangement, no payments made.

Account Status; Default

Account owner now; Lowell Portfolio 1

Letter from Lowell Portfolio1 dated 01/08/2014 saying they are now the new owner of alledged debt received 06/08/2014


Letter from Capital 1 dated 01/08/ 2014 saying they had sold the alleged debt to Lowell Portfolio 1 recieved 08/08/2014 . Letter obviously from Lowell in their envelope with LOW 101 code on side of letter.


14/08/2014 Uploaded documents today

1. Application form, Cap 1 say is the executed agreement. An ultra short application form.

2. When I said to them no prescribed terms they sent them saying this is a copy of the back of the ultra short application form.
3. When I told them the only thing on the back was a Capital 1 logo and a return address and what they sent had a different code. They sent the terms and conditions, uploaded
4. Uploaded Default note the only one I received. They said they sent a default note for the total amount on the 7 Jan 2009 but they did not have a copy of it. I never received one.
5. uploaded two letters from Cap 1. These explain their thinking, lol

Thanks every one and Never In Doubt.I know you are very busy. Nothing further yet fro Lowell

Sent the SB letter as Niddy said. They said not SB then sent the next SB letter as Niddy said.

Got the letter as stated today dayed 29 Dec. Saying will take legal action if no agreement to pay within 7 days.

[PlanB]

Re: Walsh1's UE Diary

Got the letter as stated today dayed 29 Dec. Saying will take legal action if no agreement to pay within 7 days.

Can you email me a copy of that letter to planb@all-about-debt.co.uk since the seven days' threat expires on Monday if that is a genuine LBA.

Capital1 application forms are normally UE but have you sent it to Niddy for assessment? It's obviously better to argue this before legal proceedings are issued.

If your last payment was August 2008 it should have become statute barred in August 2014. What reason did Lowell give for refuting the debt was/is SB?

[Walsh1]

Re: Walsh1's UE Diary

Away from computer at the moment. Using iphone so can't email letter.
Niddy seen all the docs. He said it was SB. Sent them the first SB letter. They replied saying the SB date was 8 Jan 2015. Because the default notice was dated 7 Jan 2009.
Niddy sent me a copy of a letter to send them. More or less stating that was rubbish and that SB was at the latest Sept 2014.

Then got this reply today dated 29/12/14. Saying not SB for first reason the default date was 7 Jan 2009 so they say SB is only 8 Jan 2015. And also they informed me they had purchased the debt and asked for payment before what they call the SB date?

[Walsh1]

Re: Walsh1's UE Diary

Niddy said they are trying to use the BMW v Hart Judgment but he said it does not apply to credit cards, because it is a simple contract

[PlanB]

Re: Walsh1's UE Diary

Sent them the first SB letter. They replied saying the SB date was 8 Jan 2015. Because the default notice was dated 7 Jan 2009. . . . . Then got this reply today dated 29/12/14. Saying not SB for first reason the default date was 7 Jan 2009 so they say SB is only 8 Jan 2015.

Are you saying you've got a letter (or two) from Lowells which actually states that the debt will be statute barred on 8th January 2015 (i.e. next Thursday) from their point of view ? If so unless they issue legal proceedings before Thursday they're screwed aren't they?

You need to do whatever it is you have to do to prevent that cause of action (county court summons) from happening even if they've got the dates wrong. Because it's easier to deal with the situation before it gets caught up in the court cycle.

[Walsh1]

Re: Walsh1's UE Diary

The letter prior to this one states that in their opinion the SB date is Jan 8 2015. Because they say the default notice is dated 7 Jan 2009. They state they can't provide a copy of the default notice because it no longer exists.

Niddy said they are talking crap and the SB date should be about Sept 2014. That they are using the Hart case incorrectly.