Advice with Lowells - having fun

Blinking_Giraffe

Hi guys. Thought I'd finally join the fray after a long time reading, lurking and generally soaking up information. Glad I did as I've decided on behalf of my daughter to take on your favourite DCA and play letter ping-pong with the knowledge that I'll most probably have to pay in the end.

First of all, no problem paying the alleged debt - if it's due and legitimate then I'll pay it on behalf of my daughter. But I have my doubts that the debt actually exists!! At present I'm about 70% yes and 30% somrthings not quite right.

Received a standard template letter addressedto my daughter from Lowells back in February stating that despite previous attempts blah blah, no contact etc please call to pay an outstanding debt. Not quite a phishing letter as it told us it was for O2, gave the account number and the owed amount of £395+.

Now my daughter has never had an O2 account (happily with Vodafone) but she may have been silly and opened one on behalf of a friend who has defaulted. She had been receing the monthly money and paying it on to O2. The friend had apparently paid up the account but I'm guessing this was a lie. I've given my daughter a good talking to on the mess she has lnded herself in and how she is legally liable for the contractand not her friend.

I then thought where is the trail of paperwork, the demands from O2, the default notice etc. Nothing but the letter from Lowell. So, I sent off the general prove it letter(with a less than perfect signature:p) and received a standard reply back from Lowell Portfolio (rather than Lowell Financial) saying that everything would be put on hold whilst they carried out an investigation.

Whilst waiting, I signed her up for a Noodle account to check for a default. Nothing showing, clean as a whistle. No reference to O2 - either a live or defaulted account and no search undertaken by Lowell. But two things stood out:
1. Moorcroft had searched her record back in early 2014
2. An associated address had been placed on her record by O2. Linked address from memory??

Now this address has nothing to do with us and Noodle removed it without a quibble. So, I'm guessing the CRA would have contacted O2 to establish its legitamacy? My daughter had suffered identity theft and fraud on her debit card which was quickly resolved and refunded by her bank. So now alarm bells are ringing and hence an element of doubt as to whether the O2 debt is hers.

Lowells came back in March to say that O2 had confirmed the debt as hers, registered to my address, gave us a date when the account was opened in 2013, when the last payment was made in Jan 2014 and a breakdown of the debt owed splitting it between Airtime and Termination fee all on their headed paper.

They say that collection will remain on hold whilst they request copy statements. This was followed up 12th March with a letter stating that the requested information may take some time and the account is still on hold. Fair play me thinks, at least they are sticking to letters and not attempting to ring - not that they have any contact details but I gather that's neverstopped them before:rotfl:

Now we have received two letters this week from Lowell Financial both of them standard threat o grams a) we regret despite previous correspondence we have not received payment or a valid reason for non-payment and today a weel later b) with reference to previous correspondence we have not heard from you and you have 7 days or one of our approved debt collection agencies will contact you.

All this raises more question than answers:
1) on one hand, everything is on hold whilst they await statements from O2. I need this information as it will rule out identity theft. Hopefully it will show any signatures and maybe give some clue as to where the strange address shows up!
2) now they say they have given evidence on their previous letter so pay up. A few dates amounts typed on a Lowells letter aint evidence.
3) This could be construed as harrassement as debt collection is on hold awaiting statements.
4) Why can't they get the evidence. It's not as if its an old debt so why do I get the feeling that they are struggling and reverting to bully boy tatics?? Two letters in a week claiming no valid reason for non-payment err Mr Bartle and Mr Cabtree - the prove it leter??

Well I'm exhausted typing this so sorry if it comes across as waffle. Do I just sit tight and await developmemts or claim harassement. Can't quite figure out why they can't come up with the evidence so that I can either pay, sell my daughter or emmigrate to Australia:T Another thing missing will be a letter of assignment or whatever its called to prove they are the legitmate owner or a default on the Noodle account (must contact the other two CRA's)

Any thoughts would be appreciated but at any rate I feel better for writing it all down. The bully boy tatics do work as my daughter would have paid it out of fear without questioning anything.

Many thanks,

Steve

sourcrates

Lowell is a large organisation, with many different offshoot companies.
Basically a lot of the time, one hand doesn't know what the other hand is doing, write back to them, enclose a copy of there letter saying the account is on hold, that should keep them quiet until they respond with the correct information, or advise otherwise.

Blinking_Giraffe

Just a quick update. After a spate of weak threatening letters, they are now offering a discount - pay 70% and have your default marked as partially settled.

Reading round other topics this would mean that they are struggling to prove an alleged debt which can only be 1.5 years old at the most. You would have thought that it would have been easy enough to gather enough evidence to prove a mobile debt.

Now, do I reply to the offer and say that this is not my (daughters) debt, please prove it or take a hike or keep quiet and wait for the nxt stage?

What will the next stage most likely be?

With the strange linked address that appeared on her Noodle report placed by O2 (now removed) I'm more inclined to think that Lowells are just trying their luck. I guess my next practical step would be to sign up and check Experian for either a default or the linked address appearing on the report. Could explain why evidence of a debt is not forth coming.

bennyhill_2

If you pay it there's almost an admission of guilt and the default will appear on her CRA file until 6 years and 1 day past the date of default.

I'd be tempted just to ignore it for the moment, and let them do the running.

chanz4

all they have to wait for is copys of bills, not hard to prove

rizla_king

Blinking_Giraffe wrote: »

Just a quick update. After a spate of weak threatening letters, they are now offering a discount - pay 70% and have your default marked as partially settled.

If theyre starting to offer that then they are stuggling.

Blinking_Giraffe

Another standad letter as now reviewing account for further action - may involve CCJ and if granted bailiffs, attachement or a field agent to visit for face to face discussions.

Now, do I sit tight or do I respond. One moment debt collection is on hold whilst they seek statements from O2 followed by 7 standard threat letters with an offer letter tucked in the middle. They sure do try confuse you (laughable) as to whats going on.

Do I refer them back to my prove it letter nad inform them a few dates and amounts on a Lowells letter is not evidence (especially when the last paragraph states that collection is on hold). Do I go down the harassament route or should I tell them to put up or shut up and that a CCJ will be defended.

I'm more inclined to sit on things as I'm interested to see where things go from here but I have a nagging feeling that another reply is warranted so that I can't be accused of no contact.

sourcrates

Basically if they can't prove the debt they are stuffed, if they can't provide you with evidence, how can they provide a court with any ???

happy_bunny_2

Send them a complaint, stating that the barrage of letters is confusing you and you have no idea why they are doing this when you are in discussions about a reduced settlement.

That will keep them quiet for a bit and focus their minds.

DandelionPatrol

happy_bunny wrote: »

Send them a complaint, stating that the barrage of letters is confusing you and you have no idea why they are doing this when you are in discussions about a reduced settlement.

That will keep them quiet for a bit and focus their minds.

Eh? Claiming to be in discussions about a reduced settlement is about as bad as actually making a reduced settlement from the point of view of admitting the debt. Only do this if you want to bring down more grief on yourselves.

Or happy-bunny, do you mean something a little different?

Blinking_Giraffe

Now received a pre-legal letter. Reading round I think this is Hampton's under a more acceptable guise.

Time for a reply as no doubt without one they wiil go down the CCJ route. At least some sort of reply will show rhem that I'm still here and fighting.

Still no further proof of the alleged debt received other than their own basic information on one of their letters. In fact, from the last paragraph on the same letter, the case is still on hold whilst they seek statements. This will be about the 6th letter received since that one going from an offer to more threatening letters.

Time to call their bluff - demanding a final response. Either CCJ or go away! I feel so harassed (not) :-)