debt collection

[shenery]

I got a letter from 3 mobile a few weeks back saying i was due them £92.

then 2 days later i got a letter from red debt collection agency saying i was due them £586.
they didnt even give me the chance to pay the money back.

What made me so surprised was that it was the first letter ive recieved from 3 mobile in 3 years.

i lost my job and sent them a letter saying i could'nt pay the contract anymore, and i never got a letter since.

I phoned up 3 mobile to pay the balance and they said i could'nt because my debt hat been sold on.

do you think i could send a letter to 3 mobile saying i dont consent to a third party collection agency and that my debt is with them and no one else?

[thebarfly1]

no need to go anywhere near 3 mobile, its the debt collection agency who are interested in the dosh now. Write them a letter looking for a copy of the bill to which you contracted to with them, chances are you wont hear from them again after that. I discharged an old electricity bill this way about 2 years ago, before i knew anything about this stuff, i simply phoned up the debt collection agency after being threathened with legal action and told them that i cant make any payment without a bill from them, and never heard from them again

[oddblock]

no need to go anywhere near 3 mobile, its the debt collection agency who are interested in the dosh now. Write them a letter looking for a copy of the bill to which you contracted to with them, chances are you wont hear from them again after that. I discharged an old electricity bill this way about 2 years ago, before i knew anything about this stuff, i simply phoned up the debt collection agency after being threathened with legal action and told them that i cant make any payment without a bill from them, and never heard from them again

I agree with this, as soon as they see your not weak and are going to be a bit of an arse pain they normally back away.

[yozhik]

I got a letter from 3 mobile a few weeks back saying i was due them £92.

then 2 days later i got a letter from red debt collection agency saying i was due them £586.
they didnt even give me the chance to pay the money back.

What made me so surprised was that it was the first letter ive recieved from 3 mobile in 3 years.

i lost my job and sent them a letter saying i could'nt pay the contract anymore, and i never got a letter since.

I phoned up 3 mobile to pay the balance and they said i could'nt because my debt hat been sold on.

do you think i could send a letter to 3 mobile saying i dont consent to a third party collection agency and that my debt is with them and no one else?

Thing is, you do not owe 3 mobile any money - they have already been paid, so the company you had a contract with has had the debt satisfied, when the debt company bought it. Balance = zero.

The debt collection company has "bet" on being able to reclaim the purchase price from you. problem for them is, as the other posters have stated; you have no contract with them.

What you are doing is asking for Verification of Debt with a request for Proof of Claim. It is a conditional acceptance, which keeps you in "honour" should it go before the court.

I accept your request for payment upon proof of claim of the debt as stated. Please provide me with the following;
1. Verification of debt, including full bookkeeping records.
2. A contract between you and me, establishing a debt, signed by both parties.
3. A bill signed by you, under full commercial liability of perjury.

Send it to the C.E.O.
Have it registered for proof of delivery.
Give them 10 days to reply.
If you do not receive a reply in that time, send a 2nd "notice".
If nothing after 10 days, send them a notice of default and claim estoppal by acquiescence and the matter is resolved.

[wise haven]

Thing is, you do not owe 3 mobile any money - they have already been paid, so the company you had a contract with has had the debt satisfied, when the debt company bought it. Balance = zero.

The debt collection company has "bet" on being able to reclaim the purchase price from you. problem for them is, as the other posters have stated; you have no contract with them.

What you are doing is asking for Verification of Debt with a request for Proof of Claim. It is a conditional acceptance, which keeps you in "honour" should it go before the court.

I accept your request for payment upon proof of claim of the debt as stated. Please provide me with the following;
1. Verification of debt, including full bookkeeping records.
2. A contract between you and me, establishing a debt, signed by both parties.
3. A bill signed by you, under full commercial liability of perjury.

Send it to the C.E.O.
Have it registered for proof of delivery.
Give them 10 days to reply.
If you do not receive a reply in that time, send a 2nd "notice".
If nothing after 10 days, send them a notice of default and claim estoppal by acquiescence and the matter is resolved.

That is the dogs bollocks yozhik - sound advice :)

[1694]

Check if the debt has been factored or just the collection outsourced. Important distinction.

Interesting that the advocates of freemanism are also clinging to the statutes that protect them whilst denouncing those that protect others.

[Ian2day]

One solution to any debt, recovery agency and their agents is to inform them that you suffer from depression. Then if you are ever in communication with them. Inform them that this is making you feel ill again and that they are required by the Financial Services Authority to cease the attampts to recover from you. Inform them that if they contunie then they are in beach of section er er er 3.1 of the regulations I think it is.

[yozhik]

Check if the debt has been factored or just the collection outsourced. Important distinction.


Correct.

My reply was based on the assumption that the debt had been sold on to a debt collection company.

If the debt has not been sold on, but as 1694 points out, it is just the collection that has been outsourced, then the activities of that outsourced service are very strictly regulated, in terms of what they can and can not do.

However, the Verification of Debt procedure can still be used for the original "debt" company, particularly if it is a bank or credit card company who have not actually given anything of value to the transaction, other than opening up a computer generated account with some credit facility. You are absolutely entitled to ask for all of the documents and "proofs of claim" as listed above.

[shenery]

Thanks for the replys.
Do you know if this applies in scotland?

[marpat]

I got a letter from 3 mobile a few weeks back saying i was due them £92.

then 2 days later i got a letter from red debt collection agency saying i was due them £586.
they didnt even give me the chance to pay the money back.

What made me so surprised was that it was the first letter ive recieved from 3 mobile in 3 years.

i lost my job and sent them a letter saying i could'nt pay the contract anymore, and i never got a letter since.

I phoned up 3 mobile to pay the balance and they said i could'nt because my debt hat been sold on.

do you think i could send a letter to 3 mobile saying i dont consent to a third party collection agency and that my debt is with them and no one else?

Maybe you should go to the citizens advice beaurea. They might be able to help you out and you can get free legal help at times.

[hey_jude]

Check if the debt has been factored or just the collection outsourced. Important distinction.

Interesting that the advocates of freemanism are also clinging to the statutes that protect them whilst denouncing those that protect others.

May I add to this, check out the company.
"Moorcroft" is now owned by Barclays/Barclaycard and "Lowell Finance" is also owned by Barclays. So if you default with Barclays and they pass it to one of these clowns you know you are still dealing with the original.

...some company's like Littlewoods Mail Order send their defaults to their own debt dept. but they're still like pooh stuck to a blanket (hard to shake off lol)

I did the paperwork for someone to write off a debt for £2,500.00 from Barclaycard through Lowell Finance they squirmed a little because it was statute barred but I had studied and didn't give up. I'm doing my sons loan now £2,700.00, he went in the bank 8 years ago, for a £100 over-draft and came out with a two grand loan. Needless to say aged 17 he spent it like it wasn't real money - oh no it wasn't it was fiat - well then he moved away and they didn't even chase him.

Does a Bill have to have a cheque at the bottom to send to the Treasury re; AFV?
Credit Card unenforceable - I re-claimed charges from my CC 2 years ago and they sent me a letter to sign - I can't remember and can't find the copy I made - what happens if I re affirmed the debt? :confused:

[whitelightrabbit]

no need to go anywhere near 3 mobile, its the debt collection agency who are interested in the dosh now. Write them a letter looking for a copy of the bill to which you contracted to with them, chances are you wont hear from them again after that. I discharged an old electricity bill this way about 2 years ago, before i knew anything about this stuff, i simply phoned up the debt collection agency after being threathened with legal action and told them that i cant make any payment without a bill from them, and never heard from them again

this works! i answered the phone to a debt collector who asked for my partner. i took a message and added that 'he has no contract with you' just before i hung up. well, she called me back screaming about how he would be sued and yelling personal insults at me. did i ever hit a nerve! her blood pressure must have been sky high! my partner went and paid the original loaner, resumed his credit with them and we never heard anything else about it.

[vostran]

Interesting that the advocates of freemanism are also clinging to the statutes that protect them whilst denouncing those that protect others.

I would think that by obbeying the rules system thaty're begging us to obbery and holding them to letter of those rules we're being honourable and reasonable were they're not.

I don't see any reason to explain myself to the guy on the phone, if he wishes to remain ignorant then that's fine with me. I'll be happy to have the debt cleared to save him doing unneccesary work futilily.

Remember they're BEGGING US to obbey these rules but they're completely ignorant of the full extent of the rules. Sucks to be them.

We're not clinging to rules, we're using TOOLS to achieve a lawful and moral ends.

[robbo95]

Thing is, you do not owe 3 mobile any money - they have already been paid, so the company you had a contract with has had the debt satisfied, when the debt company bought it. Balance = zero.

The debt collection company has "bet" on being able to reclaim the purchase price from you. problem for them is, as the other posters have stated; you have no contract with them.

What you are doing is asking for Verification of Debt with a request for Proof of Claim. It is a conditional acceptance, which keeps you in "honour" should it go before the court.

I accept your request for payment upon proof of claim of the debt as stated. Please provide me with the following;
1. Verification of debt, including full bookkeeping records.
2. A contract between you and me, establishing a debt, signed by both parties.
3. A bill signed by you, under full commercial liability of perjury.

Send it to the C.E.O.
Have it registered for proof of delivery.
Give them 10 days to reply.
If you do not receive a reply in that time, send a 2nd "notice".
If nothing after 10 days, send them a notice of default and claim estoppal by acquiescence and the matter is resolved.


Hi,

I need some help if possible.

Yesterday i got a letter from a DCA stating that they have brought a £690 debt from o2, this was from 2006-2007.
I did have an account with them at that time and disconnected due to poor service, when i ported my number out, i never got 1 bill from them, so to say I owe them this money I have no idea as i was never billed.

I have read around and come on here as good people trying to helpout.

So I called them today and asked for the above, The nice chap (smuck bas**rd) said that a mobile phone contract is non-commercial as it does not need to be signed for?
Also that they can send me the bill.

Can anyone help me and tell me where i stand with them, the company is Lowell Portfolio I. they have said they have brought the debt.

I was never credit checked on that account either if that makes any diffrence.

[spoonogsback]

There is no such thing as "freemanism"
Interesting that the advocates of freemanism are also clinging to the statutes that protect them whilst denouncing those that protect others.
__________________
You don't seem to understand or comprehend whats happening here so Please don't jump to conclusions.
Do more research......Winston shrout for starters...............

[scotfree]

Thanks for the replys.
Do you know if this applies in scotland?

I DID THIS WITH Debt gang who now clain my Council Tax $$$

The debt collection company has "bet" on being able to reclaim the purchase price from you. problem for them is, as the other posters have stated; you have no contract with them.

What you are doing is asking for Verification of Debt with a request for Proof of Claim. It is a conditional acceptance, which keeps you in "honour" should it go before the court.

I accept your request for payment upon proof of claim of the debt as stated. Please provide me with the following;
1. Verification of debt, including full bookkeeping records.
2. A contract between you and me, establishing a debt, signed by both parties.
3. A bill signed by you, under full commercial liability of perjury.

Send it to the C.E.O.
Have it registered for proof of delivery.
Give them 10 days to reply.
If you do not receive a reply in that time, send a 2nd "notice".
If nothing after 10 days, send them a notice of default and claim estoppal by acquiescence and the matter is resolved.

[robbo95]

Hi,

I need some help if possible.

Yesterday i got a letter from a DCA stating that they have brought a £690 debt from o2, this was from 2006-2007.
I did have an account with them at that time and disconnected due to poor service, when i ported my number out, i never got 1 bill from them, so to say I owe them this money I have no idea as i was never billed.

I have read around and come on here as good people trying to helpout.

So I called them today and asked for the above, The nice chap (smuck bas**rd) said that a mobile phone contract is non-commercial as it does not need to be signed for?
Also that they can send me the bill.

Can anyone help me and tell me where i stand with them, the company is Lowell Portfolio I. they have said they have brought the debt.

I was never credit checked on that account either if that makes any diffrence.

Can anyone help with the above?

Its really stressing me out

Thanks

[outelligent]

Hi Rob.
Have you done as 'yozhik' and 'scotfree' have said above?

a mobile phone contract is non-commercial as it does not need to be signed for?
Hes talking bullshit there mate.

Also that they can send me the bill.
They wont send you a bill they will send you a invoice.

Do as explained above, but expect them to ignore you or keep pestering.
If you did that and this went to court it shows you have done all you can.

[robbo95]

Hi Rob.
Have you done as 'yozhik' and 'scotfree' have said above?


Hes talking bullshit there mate.


They wont send you a bill they will send you a invoice.

Do as explained above, but expect them to ignore you or keep pestering.
If you did that and this went to court it shows you have done all you can.


Hi Mate,

Yeah when i called them i asked him for

1. Verification of debt, including full bookkeeping records.
2. A contract between you and me, establishing a debt, signed by both parties.
3. A bill signed by you, under full commercial liability of perjury.

At this point he said "hang on, a mobile contract is non-commercial. When you put the sim in, you are agee to the contract that does not have to be signed for"?

Then i aksed for the bill he said that he will send that out. which may well be an invoice.

Are o2 in their right to pass data sensivte information to someone without my consent? and also i dont owe them money, if i do owe money then that would be to o2 not the DCA, how the hell is this legal if i have no contract with the DCA?
Should i send this in via writing to them asking the above?

Thanks for the help in advance

[adzboarder]

You guys all rock!!

Thats some awesome advice there, thanks all for spreading this outstanding and astonishing knowledge - I and many others truly appreciate this!! :)

I want to know about council tax - do I have to pay or what? It's a total rip-off of £1400 this year!?!

A fat slice of the pittance we get paid to go with the other fat slice of income tax - will there be anything in the pot to buy food??!

Any comments on council tax you mad geniuses??

Best Wishes to all Freemen.

[dreamweaver]

I DID THIS WITH Debt gang who now clain my Council Tax $$$

Scotfree, do you have any idea if this will work in England? I think the procedure for council tax debt recovery in Scotland is different and that we have less rights in England.

My understanding is that in England bailiffs acting for the court to collect council tax have more powers than those collecting other debts.

[sindakit]

what if you have a debt that you started to pay, thus entering a contract with a DCA, before you realised the truth about contract etc.

I curently have a DD set up paying around £60 a month to a DCA. Can i cancel this DD and ask for the validation, 2 signed party agreement and a bill or is it too late now i've accepted to pay?

tbh i dont think there's much left to pay anyway lol but i've managed to get off with 9 parking tickets so far so i'm hoping to tally some more victories so my friends will take notice of the freeman philosophy.

[crowd control]

I DID THIS WITH Debt gang who now clain my Council Tax $$$

The debt collection company has "bet" on being able to reclaim the purchase price from you. problem for them is, as the other posters have stated; you have no contract with them.

What you are doing is asking for Verification of Debt with a request for Proof of Claim. It is a conditional acceptance, which keeps you in "honour" should it go before the court.

I accept your request for payment upon proof of claim of the debt as stated. Please provide me with the following;
1. Verification of debt, including full bookkeeping records.
2. A contract between you and me, establishing a debt, signed by both parties.
3. A bill signed by you, under full commercial liability of perjury.

Send it to the C.E.O.
Have it registered for proof of delivery.
Give them 10 days to reply.
If you do not receive a reply in that time, send a 2nd "notice".
If nothing after 10 days, send them a notice of default and claim estoppal by acquiescence and the matter is resolved.


Nice one, do you have a notice of default template handy?

[demise_of_time]

Thing is, you do not owe 3 mobile any money - they have already been paid, so the company you had a contract with has had the debt satisfied, when the debt company bought it. Balance = zero.

The debt collection company has "bet" on being able to reclaim the purchase price from you. problem for them is, as the other posters have stated; you have no contract with them.

What you are doing is asking for Verification of Debt with a request for Proof of Claim. It is a conditional acceptance, which keeps you in "honour" should it go before the court.

I accept your request for payment upon proof of claim of the debt as stated. Please provide me with the following;
1. Verification of debt, including full bookkeeping records.
2. A contract between you and me, establishing a debt, signed by both parties.
3. A bill signed by you, under full commercial liability of perjury.

Send it to the C.E.O.
Have it registered for proof of delivery.
Give them 10 days to reply.
If you do not receive a reply in that time, send a 2nd "notice".
If nothing after 10 days, send them a notice of default and claim estoppal by acquiescence and the matter is resolved.

This sounds like good advice for the future :)

[number_6]

Thing is, you do not owe 3 mobile any money - they have already been paid, so the company you had a contract with has had the debt satisfied, when the debt company bought it. Balance = zero.

The OP should read his contract he/she signed with the mobile company carefully. It is usual that there will be a clause in there that the person signing accepts that should they default they agree the creditor has the right to sell the debt to a third party and assign all rights for collecting the debts to the third party. If he has signed such an agreement the DCA can take him to Court.

[crowd control]

hmm, that's what I've been thinking, I think it's called (or maybe part of the) credit agreement(in Scotland).

could be wrong.

[pirateben]

all debts from banks, building societys, mobile phone companies and the like are secondary debts and so they are very easy to get out of, i had about 12000 debt on 3 cards and 2 bank accounts and because i lost my job about 2 years ago, i had to fill in some paperwork that i got from a debt advice agency and now i pay £2 a week to cover all of them for the next 5 years and after that its all written off!
so thats £12000 and im paying back a total of about £1000
just doing my bit to bring down the system :D thats £11000 some fat cat didnt get in his bonus

debts from courts and things like council tax are enforcable in court, but dont ever be fooled into thinking others are untill you check them out!

[mr_pixie]

Bump

[merlincove]

You guys all rock!!

Thats some awesome advice there, thanks all for spreading this outstanding and astonishing knowledge - I and many others truly appreciate this!! :)

I want to know about council tax - do I have to pay or what? It's a total rip-off of £1400 this year!?!

A fat slice of the pittance we get paid to go with the other fat slice of income tax - will there be anything in the pot to buy food??!

Any comments on council tax you mad geniuses??

Best Wishes to all Freemen.

would be nice to clirify this as council tax is a not a regular contract - you don't sign anything but have to pay by law of the land? So when this invariably gets passed on to the balif, can we execute the contract thing with them? They only pass it back to the council at any rate and then it is down to the courts we go?

[number_6]

One thing to always bear in mind with Council tax. After it is has been to the bailiff and still not paid, it will be passed back to the Council. You will then again be summonsed back to Court. If in Court you then claim that you are not refusing to pay but you cannot pay due to hardship etc the Court will be on your side. If however at this juncture you refuse point blank to pay, off to prison you go.

[runlikehell]

One solution to any debt, recovery agency and their agents is to inform them that you suffer from depression. Then if you are ever in communication with them. Inform them that this is making you feel ill again and that they are required by the Financial Services Authority to cease the attampts to recover from you. Inform them that if they contunie then they are in beach of section er er er 3.1 of the regulations I think it is.

Nice One Ian2day! Thank's for sharing that! ;)

this works! i answered the phone to a debt collector who asked for my partner. i took a message and added that 'he has no contract with you' just before i hung up. well, she called me back screaming about how he would be sued and yelling personal insults at me. did i ever hit a nerve! her blood pressure must have been sky high! my partner went and paid the original loaner, resumed his credit with them and we never heard anything else about it.

Shame you dident advise her, that the call was being recorded ;);)

[arten]

Hi guys
First of all I have to say the Council Tax situation is bloody well ridiculous and out of control. I read somewhere that a percentage of what we pay is being paid into the EU which is a disgrace if true.
What I don't like about this system is you are just told this is what we want and you must pay, there is no room for negotiaiton.
We really have to get together and change things for the better and there is more than one way to skin these government fat cats.
With that in mind a vist to this link will give you Information about a new registered political party that is designed with the idea of the Protest Vote tapping into Voter Apathy and Political Dissention.
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?ref=home#/profile.php?id=1226417232&ref=ts
Please give it a whirl we have to do something and this is another good route to go down.
I now find myself embroiled in a legal battle with my former employer the dispute is over holiday pay. Three years ago he coerced me to go through his books which mean't paying tax and ni contributions. I have pointed out to him that there is no law that requires me to do so but he insist that there is and that if I was paid by him and never declared any earnings the taxman would be after him for it. I think he is talking complete crap.
Anyway in the three years I have been on his books I have not received any holiday pay and by the law he operates under I must receive such pay. He tried to argue that my holiday pay was included in my normal hourly rate.
I then dropped a bombshell on him and pointed out that in our letter of contract he stated that my rate of pay did not included holiday pay.
At that point he admitted he had a legal obligation to pay me something.
He then offered a derisory amount based on a small percentage of my hourly rate over 12 months. I rejected his offer and presented him with an amount based on a calculation of my full hourly rate over 3 years.
It comes to several thousand pounds I have given him 14 days to settle out of court and said I would accept £6000 excluding interest but should he go into court he would have to pay considerably more plus interest.
I have just found out that he is breaking employment law by refusing to give me a Reference leaving himself open to another writ based on my loss of earnings. I am developing a taste for all this freeman stuff and enjoy being my own advocate.

[runlikehell]

Correct. My reply was based on the assumption that the debt had been sold on to a debt collection company.

How do you tell the difference between being sold on to another debt agency or being out-sourced?

[arten]

How do you tell the difference between being sold on to another debt agency or being out-sourced?

My guess is you must ascertain this for yourself by asking the person or company that you contracted with in the first instance.

[number_6]

How do you tell the difference between being sold on to another debt agency or being out-sourced?

If the debt has been sold on you will receive a "Notice of Assignment" in the post. This notice MUST be in writing. A telephone call from a DCA claiming ownership is not enough.

[sindakit]

One thing to always bear in mind with Council tax. After it is has been to the bailiff and still not paid, it will be passed back to the Council. You will then again be summonsed back to Court. If in Court you then claim that you are not refusing to pay but you cannot pay due to hardship etc the Court will be on your side. If however at this juncture you refuse point blank to pay, off to prison you go.

who will be invited? You or your person?
If it was me i'd decline :p

[number_6]

who will be invited? You or your person?
If it was me i'd decline :p

So, if a warrant is issued for your arrest what do you do when the police turn up at your house?

[shenery]

I accept your request for payment upon proof of claim of the debt as stated. Please provide me with the following;
1. Verification of debt, including full bookkeeping records.
2. A contract between you and me, establishing a debt, signed by both parties.
3. A bill signed by you, under full commercial liability of perjury.

Send it to the C.E.O.
Have it registered for proof of delivery.
Give them 10 days to reply.
If you do not receive a reply in that time, send a 2nd "notice".


Ive done all of that and have all the records but they havent even aknowledged any of it, all they have sent me is the bill from 3 mobile and all the numbers i phoned etc and loads of the usual letters saying they're taking me to court and even one saying they would take 270 pounds off my instead of 584.

They original bill was for £62!!!!

I havent sent the notice letter of default and claim estoppal yet.
Do you think if i send this last letter they will stop sending me letters?

[number_6]

Do you think if i send this last letter they will stop sending me letters?

No

[the nine]

No

why dont you research more? you offer advice off the top off your head..
are you a shill?
try watching john harris for starters, before stating what will and will not happen, why even post in here, the freeman on the land forum?

I am sure void is waiting for his cock to be cleaned by you again!

[number_6]

why dont you research more? you offer advice off the top off your head..
are you a shill?

Er, apologies but I probably know a tad bit more about the debt collection industry than you can imagine. The question was asked will it stop a DCA contacting and I answered truthfully. That letter might interrupt their actions for a few minutes until they stop laughing and pick themselves back up off the floor.
As for cleaning cocks I was under the impression that was your forte.

[the nine]

Er, apologies but I probably know a tad bit more about the debt collection industry than you can imagine. The question was asked will it stop a DCA contacting and I answered truthfully. That letter might interrupt their actions for a few minutes until they stop laughing and pick themselves back up off the floor.
As for cleaning cocks I was under the impression that was your forte.

no it wasnt you said you will go to prison..
I have seen several of your negative posts on here, and I am under the impression that you have an agenda..
118 - MATE! got your number

[number_6]

no it wasnt you said you will go to prison..
I have seen several of your negative posts on here, and I am under the impression that you have an agenda..
118 - MATE! got your number

No, You have it all wrong. Re read the posts. When I said "No" I was replying to a question asked about DCAs chasing a 3 mobile debt. As for prison, elsewhere I said that it is possible to be imprisoned if you REFUSE to pay Council Tax when you are in the magistrates court. If you check you will see what I mean. The two are totally different issues.

[arten]

So, if a warrant is issued for your arrest what do you do when the police turn up at your house?

If you are a Freeman you can tell them that if they arrest you then you are going to sue them. That is the message I get from the freeman movement You do Not have to answer any questions that the police have for you. You decline to attend their place of business if summoned to court. U do not get in the dock or take the oath etc Total non compliance and you swing the situation back to them by keep asking them questions.

[yozhik]

Can anyone help me and tell me where i stand with them, the company is Lowell Portfolio I. they have said they have brought the debt.


You do not have a contract with them.

If they truly have bought the debt, it means they have paid your debt on your behalf, betting that their bullying tactics will result in a profit.

You had debt with O2.
O2 sold the debt to Lowell for x % of outstanding.
O2 cleared debt from their books. (you owe them nothing)

Lowell now harass you to profit from the discounted debt they have purchased.
However, you do not have a contract with them.
Their transaction was with O2.

If they can not recover their investment from you; they lose.

Make an official request to O2 for the true accounting on this account.
From what you have said, I would wager that it is at zero and has been closed. The debt has been satisfied because it has been sold.

Lowell will not have any paperwork with you, because you never contracted with them.

Be very clear on how this very simple con game works ...

Lowell bought a discounted debt on the assumption that they could profit from squeezing the original amount plus their fictitious and excessive fees on top of it.
Lowell is playing the numbers game.
Buy discounted debt and write letters threatening enough to trick people into paying them, so they can make a profit.
That's all this is ... a numbers game ... bullying and bullshit.

O2 sold the debt at a discount price.
For them, it does not exist anymore.

Stick to your plan.
Insist on verification of debt and proof of claim.
Ask for a copy of a signed contract you have with Lowell.
Ask for a signed bill.

Make an official request for account status from O2.
If they truly have sold the debt, it will be closed and have a zero balance.

[number_6]

yozhik, I have to disagree. When robbo95 signed his original agreement there will probably be a paragraph stating that robbo95 agrees that the original creditor may sell his debt to a third party and that robbo95 agrees that this third party has all rights to collect. robbo95 must get a copy of his agreement from his original creditor by doing a CCA request for £1.

[hey_jude]

Lowell Portfolio and Lowell Financial are complete pussies! They are relying on you being scared and caving-in to their bullying tactics.

I have fought Lowell twice and won twice.

I also spoke to a solicitor acting for the DCA HFO and told him my daughter had no contract with HFO as she defaulted to and was contracted to Welcome Finance who had sold the debt on, and the solicitor agreed!

HFO has not got her correct address and the solicitor asked me to give it to him, I said "no, I don't have to" and he agreed.

I also asked him if he being a solicitor was then involved in the "legal or lawfull" pursuit of money on behalf of HFO and he replied "legal" :D

Everytime he answered you could hear his sighs he was well pissed off!

[number_6]

I agree Lowell are normally easy to deal with. They tend to intimidate in their correspondence and rely on peoples' fear. It should always be remembered that if a DCA has not actually purchased a debt, and are just attempting to collect on behalf of another, you can quite happily tell them to F off. A CCA request to Lowell will normally call them off.

[hey_jude]

yes, No.6 I do agree with that ...I'm in 2 battles a.t.m with barclaycard and capital one.

Capital One had the audacity to send me a mocked-up copy contract [that was really my application form]
and in my return letter I put "you do realise you have to bring the original to court when we attend"
I just got a reply saying they are not responding to anymore of my letters and they will defend any action I may take.

when it goes to a DCA I will also say no contract and God willing ...bye bye [interest only debt] :)

[arten]

robbo95 must get a copy of his agreement from his original creditor by doing a CCA request for £1.

What is CCA County Court Action? If not where does one make a request and to whom? Cheers

[hey_jude]

A CCA is a request for a copy of your Consumer Credit Agreement. :)

[hey_jude]

If you signed a CCA with your bank/credit card/store card et cetera then you apply to them for the CCA - if they cannot send you a copy [like barclaycard & capital one cannot in my case] it's probably because they haven't got one because you didn't sign one, you signed an application form only and that makes the debt unenforceable.

[number_6]

What is CCA County Court Action? If not where does one make a request and to whom? Cheers

A CCA Request that you send to somebody chasing you. DO NOT sign it, print your name at the bottom, and pay the £1 by postal order or by a third party's cheque. DCAs have been known to lift signatures and produce "copies" of agreements that they otherwise could not have.


Account no:XXXXXX

This letter is a formal request pursuant to s.77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. I require you to provide me with a true copy of the Credit Agreement relating to the above account, together with any other documentation the Act requires you to provide.

I expect you to comply fully and properly with this request, within the statutory time limit. You are reminded that should you fail to comply with my request, the provisions of s.77(6) will apply.

If it is your view that you are not the creditor, s.175 of the CCA 1974 applies in the case of a simple assignment, and places a duty upon you to pass this request to the creditor. In the case of an absolute assignment, you are a creditor as defined by s.189. If you contend that you purchased the rights but not the duties of any agreement, you are reminded that s.189 of the Act is clear that an assignment is of both rights and duties.

Your attention is drawn to ss.5(2), 3(b),6 and 7 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPUTR).

I enclose a cheque in the sum of £1.00, which is the statutory fee. Note that these funds are not to be used for any other purpose.

If you are unable to comply fully and properly with this request, you should confirm this in writing at the earliest opportunity, and certainly within the statutory time limit for compliance, and return the fee.

[arten]

A CCA Request that you send to somebody chasing you. DO NOT sign it, print your name at the bottom, and pay the £1 by postal order or by a third party's cheque. DCAs have been known to lift signatures and produce "copies" of agreements that they otherwise could not have.


Account no:XXXXXX

This letter is a formal request pursuant to s.77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. I require you to provide me with a true copy of the Credit Agreement relating to the above account, together with any other documentation the Act requires you to provide.

I expect you to comply fully and properly with this request, within the statutory time limit. You are reminded that should you fail to comply with my request, the provisions of s.77(6) will apply.

If it is your view that you are not the creditor, s.175 of the CCA 1974 applies in the case of a simple assignment, and places a duty upon you to pass this request to the creditor. In the case of an absolute assignment, you are a creditor as defined by s.189. If you contend that you purchased the rights but not the duties of any agreement, you are reminded that s.189 of the Act is clear that an assignment is of both rights and duties.

Your attention is drawn to ss.5(2), 3(b),6 and 7 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPUTR).

I enclose a cheque in the sum of £1.00, which is the statutory fee. Note that these funds are not to be used for any other purpose.

If you are unable to comply fully and properly with this request, you should confirm this in writing at the earliest opportunity, and certainly within the statutory time limit for compliance, and return the fee.

Thanks M8 I will buy you a beer when we meet up!

[number_6]

Thanks M8 I will buy you a beer when we meet up!

You're welcome. You will probably get a letter back saying that they are applying to the original creditor for a copy of the agreement. This will make them put everything on hold. Hopefully they will not have a copy, and they will fade away.

[yozhik]

Nice post Number 6 !
;)

[pri01]

I havent sent the notice letter of default and claim estoppal yet.
Do you think if i send this last letter they will stop sending me letters?

What is a claim estoppal?

[yozhik]

A CCA Request that you send to somebody chasing you. DO NOT sign it, print your name at the bottom, and pay the £1 by postal order or by a third party's cheque. DCAs have been known to lift signatures and produce "copies" of agreements that they otherwise could not have.


Could not agree more!
I wanted this to be highlighted again in this thread because it is VERY serious. :mad:

There are countless instances of exactly this happening; where the financial institution does not have a valid CCA, so they doctor one and lift your signature from recent correspondence, to complete the FRAUDULENT agreement, that never existed.

The wording of the Act is a "true copy" ... banks (etc) have argued that creating an agreement, with document software (photoshop, adobe, etc) is perfectly LEGAL (note: not lawful) and that the created document is a true copy of an agreement.

Yes - it is fraud.

However, the court system appears to (currently) protect this behaviour.

So do as number_6 suggests ... NEVER send any correspondence with your signature. Chances are they do not have it and you are providing them with the one piece of the puzzle they require, to complete the deception and fraud.

[adzboarder]

Thanks guys for this!

I have told about 8 people about this in detail and will continue to help everyone in my sphere of influence to relieve themselves of bailiff related debts, this is awesome stuff.

Thanks to all who have posted. :)

True knowledge to use their system against them. wow man.

[dreamweaver]

Correct.

My reply was based on the assumption that the debt had been sold on to a debt collection company.

If the debt has not been sold on, but as 1694 points out, it is just the collection that has been outsourced, then the activities of that outsourced service are very strictly regulated, in terms of what they can and can not do.

However, the Verification of Debt procedure can still be used for the original "debt" company, particularly if it is a bank or credit card company who have not actually given anything of value to the transaction, other than opening up a computer generated account with some credit facility. You are absolutely entitled to ask for all of the documents and "proofs of claim" as listed above.

yozhik, can I just check with you that I am following correct procedure? I have received a letter addressed to the "person" who bears my name.

The letter is headed "NOTICE OF INTENDED COURT PROCEEDINGS" and concerns an alleged bill with a gas company. The company is a firm of debt collecting solicitors based in Scotland.

I phoned them to ask what records they had relating to this account and whether they had a contract between me and the debt collecting firm (not the gas company), establishing a debt, signed by both parties.

There was a long pause on the phone and the woman sounded confused by this request. She said they were collecting the bill "on behalf" of the gas company.

I'm about to ask in writing for Verification of Debt with a request for Proof of Claim, i.e:

"I accept your request for payment upon proof of claim of the debt as stated. Please provide me with the following;
1. Verification of debt, including full bookkeeping records.
2. A contract between you and me, establishing a debt, signed by both parties.
3. A bill signed by you, under full commercial liability of perjury."

But I just want to check if this is the right procedure for these circumstances, particularly in the light of 1694's post about distinguishing between factoring and outsourcing of collection.

Thanks.

[yozhik]

Dreamweaver ... replied to your PM :)

[girlgye]

yozhik, I have to disagree. When robbo95 signed his original agreement there will probably be a paragraph stating that robbo95 agrees that the original creditor may sell his debt to a third party and that robbo95 agrees that this third party has all rights to collect. robbo95 must get a copy of his agreement from his original creditor by doing a CCA request for £1.

No6 What are you on this site for? Clearly you are not remotely interested in FOL. You demonstrate you are not reading the posts and when asked pertinent questions you ignore them. So with all due respect my friend although your wealth of experience is valued it is about as much relevance as the 80 million or so Statutes floating round the globe.

As for what he originally signed in the first place you will understand that what he signed in the first place is a pile of crap based on a fallacy which he never agreed to in the first place he just thought he had to agree.

For you information I have yet to see a FOL go to prison for not paying their Council Tax. Perhaps if you care to look up why that is for yourself we may be able to have an intelligent debate with you.

Peace.

[girlgye]

If you signed a CCA with your bank/credit card/store card et cetera then you apply to them for the CCA - if they cannot send you a copy [like barclaycard & capital one cannot in my case] it's probably because they haven't got one because you didn't sign one, you signed an application form only and that makes the debt unenforceable.
:eek:

Please run that by me again. Doe this apply to a debt you have put up on your property too?

[hey_jude]

hi girlgye

I wrote to Barclaycard and Capital One asking for a true copy of the Consumer Credit Agreement... Barclaycard replied with an empty envelope and Capital One sent a botched 'copy' which was in fact a cut & paste job and is now with the Financial Ombudsman for review as my complaint.

Barclaycard has passed the account to a debt collector and I tell them to eff off I don't have a contract with them and Capital One has just stopped contacting me [I wonder why]

I don't think this strategy works with mortgages as you signed the contract and solicitors witnessed this. So it's a binding contract signed by both parties.

You could try writing to HM Treasury and clearly tell them that you would like to pay your mortgage with REAL money [seeing as the lovely Gordon Brown has Bankrupted the country and the paper money you have is actually worthless] can they either swap your paper rubbish for gold or pay the mortgage for you. Worth a try :D

[tien an]

No6 What are you on this site for? Clearly you are not remotely interested in FOL. You demonstrate you are not reading the posts and when asked pertinent questions you ignore them. So with all due respect my friend although your wealth of experience is valued it is about as much relevance as the 80 million or so Statutes floating round the globe.

As for what he originally signed in the first place you will understand that what he signed in the first place is a pile of crap based on a fallacy which he never agreed to in the first place he just thought he had to agree.

...

Peace.

Hi girlgye,

I too have had cause to give number_6 a prod in the ribs in the past, but I (somewhat reluctantly) have to agree with him in this case, especially on this point.
I mean, of course, having signed a loan agreement (contract?) with a bank in which it clearly states (in the small print), that I agree to them "outsourcing the collection of any debt..."
For the moment, I don't know how to get around this obstacle.

Yes, he can be a pain in the butt at times...most of the time...but I've taken to ignoring him when he does this.

His last couple of contributions have been excellent.

Carrot and stick...carrot and stick... (just joking).


For you information I have yet to see a FOL go to prison for not paying their Council Tax. Perhaps if you care to look up why that is for yourself we may be able to have an intelligent debate with you.


Now this is interesting.
How did the FOL's get away with not going to prison?

Given that (another thing pointed out by number_6, I believe) bailiffs acting for the court in the collection of government taxes do have additional powers compared to those collecting outstanding debts they have bought from, among others, banks and CCard Companies, I myself am a not going to go down that route until I know a lot more about what I'm doing...perhaps next (financial) year. (if there is one...!)

The fox, as well as the stoat, has to know how to remain motionless at times.

Heavenly Peace.
tien an.

[number_6]

No6 What are you on this site for? Clearly you are not remotely interested in FOL.
.

Look, I am on your side. But, I am a realist. There is no point in fooling yourself. I would suggest that some advice posted in these forums is well meant, but frankly is rubbish, and I wish to point that out. Everything I post I do speak from personal experience, not stuff I have read on the internet. Just because I question some methods of implementing FOL does not mean that I am against the principle. I do, however question the motivation behind some that take up FOL. If it is merely to get out of paying money back that you agree to when borrowing, then I consider that action as dishonourable. After all, the borrower gave his word and that should be enough. In my world your word is your bond.
I have watched much of the likes of John Harris, and although I consider he may be a clever speaker there are many flaws in his arguments, which should be questioned. Remember just because he projects a phrase onto a wall and stands there and reads it out slowly to you, (very clever) it does not automatically follow that the phrase has the authority that his method is implying. But it does have that effect on the viewer which is the intention.
tien an, I reckognise that you consider me a pain in the butt (most of the time!) but as I said before, I really am on your side.

[grachtengordel]

Look, I am on your side

no you are not

But, I am a realist

you are not that either

I would suggest that some advice posted in these forums is well meant, but frankly is rubbish,

yes, yours.

[yozhik]

number_6 ... not that you need it; but I understand what you are doing.
There are times we "bang heads" on issues :rolleyes: ... but there are also more times we agree.

You bring relevant and rational views to some emotion driven topics.

I appreciate your input.

[number_6]

yes, yours.

I would be grateful, grachtengordel if you could point me in the direction of any posts that I have made that are not the truth.
I have come to understand that if one here questions the methods employed to implement the concept of FOL, then one is liable to be shot down pretty quick by the mob, and be accused of being a troll, or asked why one is even here. But, by questioning some of the (quite frankly) crazy posts by some does not mean that I am against the principle, but disagree with their methods.
I will say it again: I am really on your side. However if FOL is to become a reality, it is something that must be scrutinised and perfected to the nth degree so that it cannot fail. Sadly I feel it is doomed to fail if some of the ideas posted here are accepted and implemented without question.

[yozhik]

I will say it again: I am really on your side. However if FOL is to become a reality, it is something that must be scrutinised and perfected to the nth degree so that it cannot fail. Sadly I feel it is doomed to fail if some of the ideas posted here are accepted and implemented without question.

I think we can all read this, comprehend this and action this.
The FOL concept is incredibly easy to get caught up in and "drunk" on the idea of getting one over TPTB.

We have to tread slowly and rationally.
Constructive criticism of a thread, a post, a concept or an idea, is just that; constructive.

Sometimes I think we all (myself included) need to stand back, pull our heads out of our asses, take a deep and think with clear heads.

Rome wasn't built in a day ... so we sure as hell won't be able to bring down Roman based law in a day either!!

[sindakit]

I think the problem, number6, is when someone makes a post and you disagree with whats being stated or respond to a question you dont elaborate or give further explanation.
There's times where you've taken the effort to post a one word reply to some people.
I dont mind your posts and enjoy everyone's input but if you can share your knowledge with those asking questions it'd help so much in furthering this movement and any discussions. :):)

[girlgye]

I would be grateful, grachtengordel if you could point me in the direction of any posts that I have made that are not the truth..

What do you understand by the word TRUTH?

I have come to understand that if one here questions the methods employed to implement the concept of FOL, then one is liable to be shot down pretty quick by the mob, and be accused of being a troll, or asked why one is even here. But, by questioning some of the (quite frankly) crazy posts by some does not mean that I am against the principle, but disagree with their methods..

Ah but you don't question do you? You just make emotive, fear mongering jeers not based on any facts. Yes of course I understand that La LAW will put me in prison if I don't pay my taxes. However, if I am to argue a point in LAW AGAINST PAYING MY TAXES based on the fact that they have no damn right to be raiding me like a bandit machine for the whole of my life for every meagre morsel I earn, then I have a CASE don't I? I know fully well you think I don't but then you justify that. I don't need hearsay evidence such as 'listen love I'm on your side'. Like the good cop said instead of the bad cop.

I will say it again: I am really on your side. However if FOL is to become a reality, it is something that must be scrutinised and perfected to the nth degree so that it cannot fail. Sadly I feel it is doomed to fail if some of the ideas posted here are accepted and implemented without question.

Please do not take this as a personal attack on you the human being, I'm sure you are a well meaning and caring man/woman, and I mean this with all due respect, I guess you will be right there in the ring perfecting it with us will you? Well come on then lets have some ideas or pertinent facts then? You know, based on the Law. You seem to think there is nothing we can do. I have yet to read a post from you where you actually contribute something that can be worked on or explored. You merely state what we here are already aware of: 'Go and poke the Grisly Bears and you might find yourself getting mauled'. You think I care any more? If you are really working on this No6 and you are on my side, as you claim, please go away and do your due diligence on what Statutes in Law (besides the ones we already know of) will counter their rules and I quote you roughly on this "that they can put us in prison if we don't pay council tax".


In answer to Yoshiks question, I can't quote any relevant case Law as no-one has needed to go to court - wonder why? And...I'm not getting ticked off with No6 at all he's not nearly the sheepie that others are at least he does have some limited understanding (but he thinks he knows loads more) of some of the Statutes in Law and we do on occasions get some samples of what she/he means. Personally I'd like every thing backed up academically but then this is a forum and people can say whatever they like as long as they are not being personally threatening to individual forum members.

As far my second loan on my home and it is a loan not backed up by any solicitors signatures it was merely backed up by the lurvely person who pursuaded me to sign the rest of my life away into bondage and slavery and who charged me £800 for the privilage.

[number_6]

There's times where you've taken the effort to post a one word reply to some people.


Because it is so obvious that what they have posted is wrong and they have not done their own research before posting. Perhaps they should then go away and check things out for themselves. As I said before, everything I post is through my personal experience, not stuff I have picked up by hearsay. Perhaps I may be accused of being cynical, but I am (probably) one of the older members of the forum, and was rebelling back in the sixties. It is a difficult battle, and it is ok for some to quote the likes of Harris on internet forums in the misguided belief that somehow you are immune from the law by the use of clever words, but believe me, it is a different matter when you hear that cell door close on you.

[number_6]

Hi, girlgye. (By the way I am male) I apologise if some of my posts appear as fearmongering, as that is not the intent. I just say how I see it, based on facts. Just because the concept of FOL may be an excellent concept, I cannot go along with some of the ideas here. Remember, if FOL is to become a reality, it HAS to be tested many many times in Court and be successful. Frankly, reading some of the posts here, it will fall at the first hurdle.
As for your second loan, I have to say, and I doubt you will like this, that the person who probably talked yourself into it the most, was yourself. You did have the choice to walk away. You were aware of the conditions of the loan and still accepted them. No matter how penalising the conditions you said yes. This cannot be the fault of the lender. Many times when attacking the likes of financial institutions or TPTB it may also be enlightening to look at ourselves.
Oh, and by the way, I don't mind personal attacks. Feel free!

[girlgye]

Hi, girlgye. (By the way I am male) I apologise if some of my posts appear as fearmongering, as that is not the intent. I just say how I see it, based on facts. Just because the concept of FOL may be an excellent concept, I cannot go along with some of the ideas here. Remember, if FOL is to become a reality, it HAS to be tested many many times in Court and be successful. Frankly, reading some of the posts here, it will fall at the first hurdle.
As for your second loan, I have to say, and I doubt you will like this, that the person who probably talked yourself into it the most, was yourself. You did have the choice to walk away. You were aware of the conditions of the loan and still accepted them. No matter how penalising the conditions you said yes. This cannot be the fault of the lender. Many times when attacking the likes of financial institutions or TPTB it may also be enlightening to look at ourselves.
Oh, and by the way, I don't mind personal attacks. Feel free!

I don't need a 'critical parent' lecture from you about my motives for my finances. Go and give your critical parent crap to the BANKS. I'm not in the business of making personal attacks you are allowing me to because you do it quite frequently to people yourself. I have yet to see one shread of evidence from you. You just come on here and slate the whole thing off quoting statutes which you claim you have thorough knowledge of which we all know are based on Fiction. Things do stand in Courts of Law as plenty of Freemen have demonstrated. By the same token there are Freemen in jail. It would seem to me to be the ones who got greedy and used the movement for purposes of Usury the very thing they are accusing the Banks of. If I no longer have the means to pay my loans I no longer have the means to pay my loans. Tough.

You're not whining for the CEO of Natwestminster Bank to be put behind bars are you?

[number_6]

. Things do stand in Courts of Law as plenty of Freemen have demonstrated.


Then I would ask you, with respect, to post details (names of defendant, which Court the case was heard in, nature of charge etc.) of such cases where the concept of FOL was used that have been successful in Court. I would like to see factual evidence, if that is ok. But remember, just because I ask this I am still not against the concept of FOL, just dubious about some actions by some here that claim to be FOL.
I am sorry if you consider what I said as a "parental lecture". I didn't mean that, and I apologise. I did say that I doubt that you will like it. But I stand by what I said. It is up to ourselves to take responsibility for our own actions, and before agreeing to sign our lives away to step back and actually think for ourself and to consider is this what I really want?.

[girlgye]

It is up to ourselves to take responsibility for our own actions, and before agreeing to sign our lives away to step back and actually think for ourself and to consider is this what I really want?.

Thats about the first sensible thing you have said. TELL THAT to my parents who signed my birth certificate thus dedicating me to a life of bondage and slavery. It is as I always suspected you have done no due diligence on this whatsover have you? Go and check the Canadian court cases I can't be bothered to look them up. Perhaps you might look at the successful court case the Maories took out against the New Zealand Government I believe they are $200 billion better off as a people. There are oceans of references on Rob Menard's channel a good place to start if you are going to be a Freeman which of course you have no intention of.

Call yourself a 60's rebel? What one was it Barder Meinhoff? The Black Panthers? Coalition against Vietnam? Anything remotely rinky dinky?

Incidently, I was invited into a Policemans car and I told him I did not recognize his admiralty juristiction. He didn't push me on the matter. Wonder why? Same way as I will not be appearing in their Courts. Perhaps when the British Freeman movement is full of more honourable, decent, respectful men, women and children those like John Harris instead of nit wits who talk to people like they are a piece of shite, who create negative rumours and suspicion perhaps when they move out of the way we might actually embrace the concept of supporting one another going into courts. When for, the most, part it has people determined to stir up disinformation and mistrust, your prediction, (well it isn't really a prediction is it when you are wilfully causing that trouble and suspicion) alas, will always ring true.

Why should I do your work for you, when you sit there slagging of John Harris for doing pretty much engaging presentations. I say his shows are engaging because he single handedly is taking this country by storm. You can't stand that though can you? Give me one piece of evidence from a John Harris presentation that is spurious. Even if you could, which you can't, so what? The man has two years experience but what he does present is for those less knowledgeable than he - a true and righteous Freeman spirit if you ask me. I would willingly do it for someone willing to evaluate the process by wading in the water with me. You however, are sitting in your frail ivory tower casting aspersions based on nothing but your own opinion. Helping and aiding no one my friend.

My own experience and it is developing by the week is they can't stand up to the arguments. They just keep issuing more threats. That's what they are just thugs who cast out threats.

[number_6]

girlgye, I am not aware of any posts that I have made where I have talked to anyone as though they are a peice of shite. I am willing to be corrected however, if you can point me to such a post.
It is ironic that you accuse me of being a member of Barda Meinhoff whilst at the same time state that it is me that makes personal insults.
It is becoming apparrent that whenever I have replied to you, your response becomes more aggressive than the last. Obviously my mere presence here irritates you. Therefore, I will bow out from this particular thread and not return. Perhaps if we bump into each other in another thread I hope that things will be better.

[dreamweaver]

I've had a response to my request for verification of the alleged debt.

They say they are acting on behalf of [Firm XYZ] "who have requested that we recover from you" the amount demanded.

They add that "there is, of course, no contract in place between you and ourselves given that we are acting as recovery agents only in this matter" and admit that there will not be any bill or any other documentation originating from themselves.

If they say they are "acting on behalf of" [Firm XYZ] but cannot provide any proof of debt, does this mean they have bought the alleged debt and are now trying to bluff their way into extorting a payment?

[girlgye]

girlgye, I am not aware of any posts that I have made where I have talked to anyone as though they are a peice of shite. I am willing to be corrected however, if you can point me to such a post.
It is ironic that you accuse me of being a member of Barda Meinhoff whilst at the same time state that it is me that makes personal insults.
It is becoming apparrent that whenever I have replied to you, your response becomes more aggressive than the last. Obviously my mere presence here irritates you. Therefore, I will bow out from this particular thread and not return. Perhaps if we bump into each other in another thread I hope that things will be better.

Actually I was being trite not aggressive. You expect me to believe you are some ex sixties rebel. I never accused you of being a BM member. I merely asked if you'd done anything exciting. You no more of a rebel than a Daily Mail reader. Respectfully, you have no interest in this subject whatsover, so I would put it to you my friend that you bow out of the Freeman on the Land threads all together. You kill threads and you irritate the hell out of a lot of people.

Peace.

[girlgye]

I've had a response to my request for verification of the alleged debt.

They say they are acting on behalf of [Firm XYZ] "who have requested that we recover from you" the amount demanded.

They add that "there is, of course, no contract in place between you and ourselves given that we are acting as recovery agents only in this matter" and admit that there will not be any bill or any other documentation originating from themselves.

If they say they are "acting on behalf of" [Firm XYZ] but cannot provide any proof of debt, does this mean they have bought the alleged debt and are now trying to bluff their way into extorting a payment?


I've had a similar letter to this and I'm going to send them a Notice of Dishonour with Opportunity to Cure letter. The original letter was a very thorough point by point letter asking them to provide proof that they can go after me for the debt. They responded but ignored the salient points. Their clerk gave me their Directors names (foolish girl). Then when I wrote to them they insidiously sent it back from an unamed clerk saying they are certified bailiffs of the court.
At present they are threatening to wait for this:

Enter my bank accounts and force the bank to pay me their money. This is now £356 on an original parking fine of £25.
Put a stop on my car!
Oh please.

[alisa2]

I've had a response to my request for verification of the alleged debt.

They say they are acting on behalf of [Firm XYZ] "who have requested that we recover from you" the amount demanded.

They add that "there is, of course, no contract in place between you and ourselves given that we are acting as recovery agents only in this matter" and admit that there will not be any bill or any other documentation originating from themselves.

If they say they are "acting on behalf of" [Firm XYZ] but cannot provide any proof of debt, does this mean they have bought the alleged debt and are now trying to bluff their way into extorting a payment?


The fact they cannot provide proof of debt means that the creditor failed to obtain your written consent to assign or sell the debt to a third party debt collector. The third party does not have ownership of debt until the creditor assigns it to him and that can only be done with your written consent or agreement. Essentially the debt still belongs to the creditor until the third party gets an agreement from you, which usually done by the debtor making a payment agreement with the third party debt collector.

The creditor always has the right to sue by retaining an attorney but the attorney has no right to collect or act as debt collector for the creditor without your wirtten consent.

I hope that helps.

[girlgye]

The fact they cannot provide proof of debt means that the creditor failed to obtain your written consent to assign or sell the debt to a third party debt collector. The third party does not have ownership of debt until the creditor assigns it to him and that can only be done with your written consent or agreement. Essentially the debt still belongs to the creditor until the third party gets an agreement from you, which usually done by the debtor making a payment agreement with the third party debt collector.

The creditor always has the right to sue by retaining an attorney but the attorney has no right to collect or act as debt collector for the creditor without your wirtten consent.

I hope that helps.

Yes it does. thanks alot.

[elemental mechanic]

I have spent all day looking at one particular debt letter i received this weekend, i came to the decision to use one of the templates i was directed to on fmotl.com.

i'm sure most are familiar with it, it starts:

Dear Sirs,

Please read the following notice thoroughly and carefully before responding. It is a notice. It informs you. It means what it says.

The reason why you need to read carefully is simple. I am offering conditional agreement. This removes controversy, and means that you no longer have any ultimate recourse to a court of law in this matter, because there is no controversy upon which it could adjudicate. You always have the option of dragging these conditions into a court of law only to be told that they are, indeed, perfectly lawful. That is, of course, always your prerogative should you decide to waste your time.

etc etc etc......................

the letter seemed to be the one i could send until i got up to the section reading....................

5. Upon proof of claim that I am legal fiction 'person' (CAPITALS.CAPITALS) being the entity to which your paperwork was addressed, and not .(lower case) of the .(lowercase)...family, as commonly called.

..................................

all seemed straight forward until i had another scan of the debt letter; at know point have they addressed me in CAPITALS.
in fact i have a couple of them that don't address me in CAPITALS.

what does this mean exactly?

can anyone throw light on this or direct me to were i can look into this some more before i send my letter.

"namaste"

[girlgye]

They didn't notify you the mechanic of the car family did they. NOpe.
See it doesn't matter whether it's capitals or not. That is a fiction.

What matters is that you are not addressed as flesh and blood sentient soul.

NO.

I put out a notice to them and said. Do not in future address me with any title or any other title I have not mentioned.

The CJ wrote back and said 'Dear Madam'. ROFL. My Strawperson names were put in small letters. They are going to keep tricking you into contracting. You must have a plan. A beginning middle and end. Three letters and no more from me then I apply for a Commercial Lien on their property. They soon shift when you start that one. Don't expect them not to sell the debt on to another one of their own companies. So.. put a clause in your Notice that will charge it to them for doing this.

[pdcdp]

am due to send this out tomorrow, what does anyone think...?

Re: Inquiry dated April 14th, 2009

Thank you for your recent inquiry dated April 14th, as delivered on April 23rd, in which you claim to have already sent a previous letter.

Please be advised that no such letter has been received from your organisation at this address, and that no liability may be assumed or implied by any inaction resultant from your failure to properly communicate your concern. Please provide a proof of mailing receipt and a copy of your alleged first letter for verification and your claim will be duly addressed.

Unfortunately your letter failed to provide a return address for communication, save for an unusual Mumbai address which one is told not to correspond with, which begs the questions- would you hand money over to an Indian company you had never heard of? Send cheques to an unusual address? Having no way to contact the company claiming the debt?

Since your company is unknown by the alleged debtor I have taken the time to find a UK address and seek clarification of your rather puzzling demands. Please identify yourself, state your business and provide evidence of a valid contract between AEGIS and JOE BLOGGS before pursuing your claim any further.

Please limit your communications to mailed letters only. Any telephone calls or personal visits from your company shall constitute harassment and appropriate actions will be taken. Telephone logs of each call and, in some cases, audio recordings are maintained for reference. No contract shall ever be accepted over the telephone, or otherwise without express, written consent and full disclosure.

Be also advised that all property of the alleged debtor is held under claim of right, all present and future income from every source is attributed to a third party under a private security agreement, and a commercial lien demonstrates ownership of title of all such property and income by a fourth party.

Prior to sending this letter I have discovered several hidden programs on the computer, clearly put there by AEGIS and used to illegally access information without even having declared your interest in this matter. I now believe your company to be operating fraudulently, have serious reservations about your intent and therefore demand your justification of these actions before entertaining your allegations any further.

No acknowledgement or acceptance of any contract, agreement or liability is expressed or implied by this communication.

Sincerely,

(Agent)

i get too wordy with these things sometimes... :p

[girlgye]

Be also advised that all property of the alleged debtor is held under claim of right, all present and future income from every source is attributed to a third party under a private security agreement, and a commercial lien demonstrates ownership of title of all such property and income by a fourth party.

.


What are you talking about here? It isn't clear. Are you telling them that your own flesh and blood is not party to any commercial lien of theirs, if so make that clear. They won't understand.

What is this letter. Is it a response to their letter? Is it a Notice? Why are you just responding back to them with letters?

Enquiry if you are in the UK not Inquiry!

[pdcdp]

that bit just demonstrates that any lien they file will be fourth in line to collect anything, and all preceding parties are private so they would have to file privately. one fact overcomes all fictions....

credit card co has sold debt onto collectors who aren't exactly playing fair! it's my first communication with them so i'm not even mentioning the credit card co yet....

i'm acting privately in commerce here, a notice isn't really a commercial tool and could confuse matters later if the matter of jurisdiction is raised.

haha, yeah, the original template was from US, nicely spotted!;)

p.s. i don't give a rat's ass if they dont understand, all the better!

[nawanda]

There's a wealth of information contained on the consumer action forum relating to requesting Consumer Credit Agreements, and what to do next if this route doesn't work.


http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk


This thread in particular contains some excellent advice and whilst quite long, is well worth a read - you'll learn a lot of you're serious about challenging your debt:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/173201-why-you-shouldnt-use.html

[pdcdp]

hehe, don't worry i'm not even slightly worried...;)

wouldn't have started it if i hadn't done the research...

[elemental mechanic]

They didn't notify you the mechanic of the car family did they. NOpe.
See it doesn't matter whether it's capitals or not. That is a fiction.

What matters is that you are not addressed as flesh and blood sentient soul.

NO.

I put out a notice to them and said. Do not in future address me with any title or any other title I have not mentioned.

The CJ wrote back and said 'Dear Madam'. ROFL. My Strawperson names were put in small letters. They are going to keep tricking you into contracting. You must have a plan. A beginning middle and end. Three letters and no more from me then I apply for a Commercial Lien on their property. They soon shift when you start that one. Don't expect them not to sell the debt on to another one of their own companies. So.. put a clause in your Notice that will charge it to them for doing this.


i'm still on it
ok after some further staring i have established that as a debt collection letter and it being the the first one received i would go a slightly different letter with them.

so then, would you (or any one else) like to give some feedback; i have kept it in mind that i want to use a three letter approach (no point in dragging this on with them longer than is necessary; so here is the first letter.

template acquired from fmotl.com

In care of:
7 xxxxxxx street
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
Near: [UCC 777]
24th April, 2009

Re: xxxx666, dated 21st April, 2009.
Notice of Request To Cease Harrassment.

To:
Roxburghe Debt Collections
PO Box 342
Surrey
KT14 6YX


Dear Sirs,

Please read the following notice thoroughly and carefully before responding. It is a notice. It informs you. It means what it says.

I refer to your letter dated 21st April, 2009.

As you are a third party intervener in this matter acting without authority, I DO NOT give you permission to interfere in my commercial affairs as you have no legal standing. I do not have a contract with you and any permission that you believe you may have from me is hereby withdrawn. If you believe that you have power of attorney to act on my behalf you are hereby fired, and any consent that you believe you may have, tacit or otherwise, is hereby withdrawn.

I am familiar with the terms of Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, and the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. And I believe, should you continue in contacting me after my request for you to cease your activity, that you will be guilty of harassment and blackmail, and you will be in breach of these acts, and you will be reported to the relevant bodies.

I am well aware of Section 40, sub-section (3) which you may consider entitles you to proceed. However upon full commercial liability and penalty of perjury you will need to supply the following Proofs of Claims:

1. Proof of Claim that your actions are reasonable.

2. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part is due, or believed by you to be due to you, and not to some other party.

3a. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part is to yourself by providing sight of the appropriate contract, or

3b. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part to persons for whom you act by providing sight of the appropriate contract.

4. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part protects you from any future loss.

5. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part is enforcement of a legal process on a Human Being under Common Law jurisdiction, who cannot possibly have such liability under said jurisdiction.

You would of course need to provide these Proofs, including showing the full and audited accounting, if you chose to go to law.

Please also note that if you contact me by telephone, after a formal request not to, you will also be in breach of the Wireless Telegraphy Act (1949) and, as such, I will report you to both Trading Standards and The Office of Fair Trading. And take further note that continued telephone calls after the receipt of a request not to call may constitute a criminal offence under Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003.

Finally, you do not, nor have you ever had, my permission to use or process my personal data in any way, and so pursuant to the Data Protection Act 1998, I hereby demand that you cease use of any and all data with regard to me, and that you immediately destroy all of my data held on your records. Failure to do so will result in a report being submitted to The Information Commissioner for Data Protection breaches.

You will be deemed to have been served notice of my request and I will deem it served three (3) days from the date of this letter. This has been sent by recorded delivery. I am advising you that any communications from you including but not limited to letters, phone calls and text messages received after this date will be recorded/noted with the intention of them being used as evidence.

Do not contact me again.

Sincerely and without ill will, vexation or frivolity


Elemental: of the Mechanic family
WITHOUT PREJUDICE, i.e. all Natural Inalienable Rights Reserved
Please address all future correspondence in the matter to a direct Human Self, namely Elemental: of the Mechanic family, as commonly called.

Encl: Original paperwork as received.

[bsmurph83]

Remember, if FOL is to become a reality, it HAS to be tested many many times in Court and be successful. Frankly, reading some of the posts here, it will fall at the first hurdle.
As for your second loan, I have to say, and I doubt you will like this, that the person who probably talked yourself into it the most, was yourself. You did have the choice to walk away. You were aware of the conditions of the loan and still accepted them. No matter how penalising the conditions you said yes. This cannot be the fault of the lender. Many times when attacking the likes of financial institutions or TPTB it may also be enlightening to look at ourselves.


Firstly, number 6, the whole point of the freeman concept is that as a sovereign freeman, we outrank and are superior in standing to man-made legal fictions such as banks, debt collectors, COURTS, etc, etc.

The idea is to use honour-dishonour process to STAY OUT OF COURT in the first place, as courts are a part of the man-made and inferior fictional world of admiralty. 'Authorities' operating in this realm can't have jurisdiction over us withou consent, thus, the idea is to step out of their sleazy clutches and NOT CONSENT to their jurisdiction. The freeman answers to noone, except to take responsibility fo his own actions.

The freeman doesn't merely pander to the whims of the courts, police, etc, etc and head into court at their whim. Courts are for dealing with CONTROVERSY, and the idea is to remain in honour and avoid controversies they hope to draw us into. They operate on and thrive on dishonour, and tricking us into being dishinourable and creating a controversy. That's why they don't explain that, for instance, when you get a traffic infringement notice in the mail, that one of your options (the best, generally speaking) is a CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE. They mention the option of going to court to dispute it though, don't they? So we voluntarily (though unknowingly) step into dishonour by arguing rather than conditionally accepting upon proof of claim.

Finally, I dislke your approach to the issue of banks and their 'loans'. Why? Because they don't loan anything. Noone besides us actually can create 'money'. Banks do not fulfil the requirements of valid, legally binding contracts. Not with credit cards, and not with loans. They 'loan' us our own credit, created with our very own signatures, and then charge US interest on it. Hence, people fight to survive merely for the privilege of paying the cost of 2 or 3 homes when they ultimately end up owning just the one. Even then, the majority of people don't own their homes (the government does) because they don't understand equitable title, allodial title, etc.

I agree we should obviously monitor ourselves and seek to maintain integrity, but the BANKS are pretty much the source of all ills on this planet. They are all bankrupt and provide us nothing of substance and issue fraudulent 'contracts' to which we are then enslaved, often for life, as we labour to 'pay back' a 'loan' that we literally created with our own signature. WE are the creditors. Noone else has any money. It's easy to say that someone 'had a choice and could have walked away', and that is true, but; sometimes people (due to their manufactured ignorance regarding 'money') find themselves stuck between a rock and a hard place, and a 'loan' from a bank seems the lesser of two evils.

Was GYE or anyone else aware of the above conditions of these pseudo loans before they signed up? No. Full disclosure is not achieved. Thus, there is no legally binding contract.

[robbo95]

yozhik, I have to disagree. When robbo95 signed his original agreement there will probably be a paragraph stating that robbo95 agrees that the original creditor may sell his debt to a third party and that robbo95 agrees that this third party has all rights to collect. robbo95 must get a copy of his agreement from his original creditor by doing a CCA request for £1.

Sorry to bring this back up peeps

Number 6, not all deals for mobiles are signed for. The term in contract states the company have the right to pass the debt on for collection on their behalf.

I will let you in to a secret, I work for o2 and it was a staff account I got for my brother.

No contract was signed for nor a credit check done. I have checked my credit file and it shows as paid and satisfied.

I’m bringing this back up as the other day they sent me a letter this time in red and a different company name but still under Lowell. On the reverse side was what looked like some kind of statement i.e. credit / debit which looked like they had made it up.

The letter said now we have provided you with your request for a statement, we see no reason for you not to pay this bill.
Then it goes on to say if not paid they will let the credit agencies know that the bill is outstanding (instated on the left was an ad for credit expert, haha)

This all did make me giggle.

My original request was for the statement and a signed copy of the contract between me and them.
I put the letter in the bin, but now thinking I should play around with them for a little longer.

My question is, if I tell them they have not provided me with this signed contract so stop sending me letters. Could I state I will contact a solicitor for harassment?

opps, just seen Elemental Mechanic post...Thats Great!!

[cosmic]

Hi, great thread! I send debt collectors and sollicitors notices to cease and desist. I have my security agreement/bc bond and strawman lien set up though) then I afv'd the credit card and liquidated it.... Does anyone here done this? on the TPUC.org are some good articles about it.
http://www.tpuc.org/node/396 afv part 1
http://www.tpuc.org/node/408 bc bond
http://www.tpuc.org/node/610 afv part 2
http://www.tpuc.org/content/accepted-value-part-3
http://www.tpuc.org/node/306

anyway, these guys https://sites.google.com/site/standingincommerce/workshops do a good seminar, I attended a few. All the best

[jon doe]

http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org has some template letters to help beat banks, credit card companies and debt collection agencies.

[steven1]

jon it would appear that your site is misleading people
Please stop Spamming the threads with the same link.

[robbo95]

i'm still on it
ok after some further staring i have established that as a debt collection letter and it being the the first one received i would go a slightly different letter with them.

so then, would you (or any one else) like to give some feedback; i have kept it in mind that i want to use a three letter approach (no point in dragging this on with them longer than is necessary; so here is the first letter.

template acquired from fmotl.com

In care of:
7 xxxxxxx street
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
Near: [UCC 777]
24th April, 2009

Re: xxxx666, dated 21st April, 2009.
Notice of Request To Cease Harrassment.

To:
Roxburghe Debt Collections
PO Box 342
Surrey
KT14 6YX


Dear Sirs,

Please read the following notice thoroughly and carefully before responding. It is a notice. It informs you. It means what it says.

I refer to your letter dated 21st April, 2009.

As you are a third party intervener in this matter acting without authority, I DO NOT give you permission to interfere in my commercial affairs as you have no legal standing. I do not have a contract with you and any permission that you believe you may have from me is hereby withdrawn. If you believe that you have power of attorney to act on my behalf you are hereby fired, and any consent that you believe you may have, tacit or otherwise, is hereby withdrawn.

I am familiar with the terms of Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, and the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. And I believe, should you continue in contacting me after my request for you to cease your activity, that you will be guilty of harassment and blackmail, and you will be in breach of these acts, and you will be reported to the relevant bodies.

I am well aware of Section 40, sub-section (3) which you may consider entitles you to proceed. However upon full commercial liability and penalty of perjury you will need to supply the following Proofs of Claims:

1. Proof of Claim that your actions are reasonable.

2. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part is due, or believed by you to be due to you, and not to some other party.

3a. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part is to yourself by providing sight of the appropriate contract, or

3b. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part to persons for whom you act by providing sight of the appropriate contract.

4. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part protects you from any future loss.

5. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part is enforcement of a legal process on a Human Being under Common Law jurisdiction, who cannot possibly have such liability under said jurisdiction.

You would of course need to provide these Proofs, including showing the full and audited accounting, if you chose to go to law.

Please also note that if you contact me by telephone, after a formal request not to, you will also be in breach of the Wireless Telegraphy Act (1949) and, as such, I will report you to both Trading Standards and The Office of Fair Trading. And take further note that continued telephone calls after the receipt of a request not to call may constitute a criminal offence under Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003.

Finally, you do not, nor have you ever had, my permission to use or process my personal data in any way, and so pursuant to the Data Protection Act 1998, I hereby demand that you cease use of any and all data with regard to me, and that you immediately destroy all of my data held on your records. Failure to do so will result in a report being submitted to The Information Commissioner for Data Protection breaches.

You will be deemed to have been served notice of my request and I will deem it served three (3) days from the date of this letter. This has been sent by recorded delivery. I am advising you that any communications from you including but not limited to letters, phone calls and text messages received after this date will be recorded/noted with the intention of them being used as evidence.

Do not contact me again.

Sincerely and without ill will, vexation or frivolity


Elemental: of the Mechanic family
WITHOUT PREJUDICE, i.e. all Natural Inalienable Rights Reserved
Please address all future correspondence in the matter to a direct Human Self, namely Elemental: of the Mechanic family, as commonly called.

Encl: Original paperwork as received.


Hi peeps,

Can anyone help me?

I sent the above as an email to Lowell portfolio I.

I got a latter a couple of days later so I ignored it as it was probably sent before my email.

However, I got this letter a couple of days back despite me withdraw any invite to write to me. This is what the letter says.

We are sorry that you feel our activities in pursuit of this outstanding balance are in breach of the guidelines laid down for debt collection by the office of fair trade. We would like to advise you this is certainly not the case as all of our procedures comply with regulations and codes of practice laid down for the industry within which we operate our business.

please be advised the Lowell Portfolio 1 LTD through its collection agent Lowell financial LTD is a contractual right too pursue the payment of the following debt its purchase from O2 LTD by Lowell Portfolio 1 LTD.


Notice of the assignment of debt was given to you in writing through our letter dated the 21 January 2009 in accordance with section 136 of the law of property Act 1925.

Since this is not regulated agreement under the consumer credit act 1974 there is no requirement for a signed contract, However we will request a copy statements from O2 UK LTD showing how the balance was accrued.
These will be forward these on to you upon receipt.

We trust this clarifies the situation and we will contact you in due time.

Yours Sincerely
Some plonker from "customer service"

Does any one have anything i could send them back? Considering I said i do not want any contact with them and would pursue this as a case of harassment.

This is the 2nd letter dated after my email and i have both letters still.

1 thing i would like to point out, I have not agreed to make any payment nor any kind of contract with them.

Thanks in advance

[radio illuminati]

I DID THIS WITH Debt gang who now clain my Council Tax $$$

The debt collection company has "bet" on being able to reclaim the purchase price from you. problem for them is, as the other posters have stated; you have no contract with them.

What you are doing is asking for Verification of Debt with a request for Proof of Claim. It is a conditional acceptance, which keeps you in "honour" should it go before the court.

I accept your request for payment upon proof of claim of the debt as stated. Please provide me with the following;
1. Verification of debt, including full bookkeeping records.
2. A contract between you and me, establishing a debt, signed by both parties.
3. A bill signed by you, under full commercial liability of perjury.

Send it to the C.E.O.
Have it registered for proof of delivery.
Give them 10 days to reply.
If you do not receive a reply in that time, send a 2nd "notice".
If nothing after 10 days, send them a notice of default and claim estoppal by acquiescence and the matter is resolved.

I'm thinking they should have a tough time when they try to bill people without the contract.

Why not turn it around and sue them for the scam they are trying to pull off. hahaha

[robbo95]

anyone help with the above?...please :)

[mark1963]

Hi peeps,

Can anyone help me?

I sent the above as an email to Lowell portfolio I.

I got a latter a couple of days later so I ignored it as it was probably sent before my email.

However, I got this letter a couple of days back despite me withdraw any invite to write to me. This is what the letter says.

We are sorry that you feel our activities in pursuit of this outstanding balance are in breach of the guidelines laid down for debt collection by the office of fair trade. We would like to advise you this is certainly not the case as all of our procedures comply with regulations and codes of practice laid down for the industry within which we operate our business.

please be advised the Lowell Portfolio 1 LTD through its collection agent Lowell financial LTD is a contractual right too pursue the payment of the following debt its purchase from O2 LTD by Lowell Portfolio 1 LTD.


Notice of the assignment of debt was given to you in writing through our letter dated the 21 January 2009 in accordance with section 136 of the law of property Act 1925.

Since this is not regulated agreement under the consumer credit act 1974 there is no requirement for a signed contract, However we will request a copy statements from O2 UK LTD showing how the balance was accrued.
These will be forward these on to you upon receipt.

We trust this clarifies the situation and we will contact you in due time.

Yours Sincerely
Some plonker from "customer service"

Does any one have anything i could send them back? Considering I said i do not want any contact with them and would pursue this as a case of harassment.

This is the 2nd letter dated after my email and i have both letters still.

1 thing i would like to point out, I have not agreed to make any payment nor any kind of contract with them.

Thanks in advance

The highlighted bit is the important bit.

They purchased the debt from O2 and in the process of buying the debt from them have zeroed your account with O2. You do not now owe O2 anything.

If a company privately buys a debt then they have done so at their own expense in the hope you do not know your consumer rights and will pay the debt. If they then come after you, you can say they are a 3rd party interloper and please supply a copy of any contract between yourself and the DCA. They cannot.

[scottishryan]

Mark is correct!

Tell them the account is in dispute with the original company, you have no contract with them and if they believe you do so...to produce it with the original signatures of both yourself and their representative and what the offer from them was.

Give them 7 days plus an additional 3 for the post by which time if the documentation is not forthcoming, no monies can be paid as no evidence exists. If the harass you with phone-calls, visits or letters after the account is shown to be in serious dispute...remind them of:

Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act

“S40 Punishment for unlawful harassment of debtors.

1. A person commits an offence if, with the object of coercing another person to pay money claimed from the other as a debt due under a contract he-
* harasses the other with demands for payment which, in respect of their frequency, or the manner or occasion of making any such demand, or of any threat or publicity by which any demand is accompanied, are calculated to subject him or members of his family or household to alarm, distress or humiliation;
* falsely represents, in relation to the money claimed, that criminal proceedings lie for failure to pay it;
* falsely represents himself to be authorised in some official capacity to claim or enforce payment; or
* utters a document falsely represented by him to have some official character, or purporting to have some official character which he know it has not.
2. A person may be guilty of an offence by virtue of sub-section (1) (a) above if he concerts with others in the taking of such actions as is described in that paragraph, notwithstanding that his own course of conduct does not by itself amount to harassment.”

Simples ;)

[blue2]

See Consumer Direct for advice if they are still online cos i think Coalition was going to end them. Creditor didn't ask your permission to pass on information. Consumer Credit Act 1974 take a look...at this..

[rumpelstilzchen]

The highlighted bit is the important bit.

They purchased the debt from O2 and in the process of buying the debt from them have zeroed your account with O2. You do not now owe O2 anything.

You have to remember within the original contract there will be a clause which states should robbo default, he agrees the debt may be assigned to a third party. robbo would have signed this contract and be bound by it.
Lowell have explained correctly in their response why (contractually) they are able to persue this debt, through the civil courts if they so wish. They have also provided robbo with a Notice of Assignment previously.

[mark1963]

You have to remember within the original contract there will be a clause which states should robbo default, he agrees the debt may be assigned to a third party. robbo would have signed this contract and be bound by it.
Lowell have explained correctly in their response why (contractually) they are able to persue this debt, through the civil courts if they so wish. They have also provided robbo with a Notice of Assignment previously.

Assigning to a third party is different when a third party buys the debt. They have admitted they have bought the debt and so have zeroed the debt with O2.

[mfrey0118]

do you think i could send a letter to 3 mobile saying i dont consent to a third party collection agency and that my debt is with them and no one else?

Dealing with the 3rd party debt collector is the easy part. Like others have said, demand they produce the original instrument of indebtedness, which they will be unable to do, and tell them in the spirit of conflict resolution, you would be willing to settle the debt if they can prove you owe them.
Also, keep in mind that as soon as they receive your letter disputing the debt, the amount needs to be "in dispute" and not in Default, according to U.S.C. Title 15 and it needs to be reported as such to the credit bureaus.

[rumpelstilzchen]

Assigning to a third party is different when a third party buys the debt.
Why?

[rumpelstilzchen]

Dealing with the 3rd party debt collector is the easy part. Ask for the original instrument of indebtedness, which they will be unable to produce,
Sometimes that is true, but these days they many times are able to produce the original note.

[mfrey0118]

Sometimes that is true, but these days they many times are able to produce the original note.

It seems to me, as I try to break down the definition of "deposit" in U.S.C., the Note is proof of payment, and the Instrument of Indebtedness that must be exchanged for it, would actually rest with him and not the company. Check out the definition in the law:

12 U.S.C. 1813, sub (i) paragraph (1)
(l) Deposit
The term ‘‘deposit’’ means—
(1) the unpaid balance of money or its
equivalent received or held by a bank or savings
association in the usual course of business
and for which it has given or is obligated
to give credit, either conditionally or
unconditionally, to a commercial, checking,
savings, time, or thrift account, or which is
evidenced by its certificate of deposit, thrift
certificate, investment certificate, certificate
of indebtedness, or other similar name,
or a check or draft drawn against a deposit
account and certified by the bank or savings
association, or a letter of credit or a traveler’s
check on which the bank or savings association
is primarily liable: Provided, That,
without limiting the generality of the term
‘‘money or its equivalent’’, any such account
or instrument must be regarded as evidencing
the receipt of the equivalent of money
when credited or issued in exchange for
checks or drafts or for a promissory note
upon which the person obtaining any such
credit or instrument is primarily or secondarily
liable, or for a charge against a deposit
account, or in settlement of checks,
drafts, or other instruments forwarded to
such bank or savings association for collection.

Ok, I bolded the parts that are relevant, because there were many "or"s.

Notice, that a deposit is a result of a transaction here. When the "bank" or whatever company you are contracting with, accepts any type of promise to pay from you, they exchange it for the "instrument of indebtedness". I believe this may be why it is necessary to ask for it. Because by law they don't have it! All they have is your promise to pay, right?

Ok, so how is this significant? It's right in the Code! The promise to pay MUST BE REGARDED AS THE EQUIVALENT OF MONEY (CURRENCY) when it is exchanged for the I.O.D.!
This lines up perfectly with the history of Bills of Exchange. THEY ARE CURRENCY!
What is a dollar? It's a signed promissory note! Why do you think the Fed only pursues people who try to recreate FRNs? Because they are attempting to engage in contract fraud! But if someone creates their own promissory note, with their own signature, they will never be charged with forgery.

So, the promissory note IS the payment, the bank accepts this AS A DEPOSIT by definition! It's an "unpaid balance". Owed to who? Whoever received the Instrument of Indebtedness in exchange for the promissory note. Which would be you!
The problem? There's always a Security Instrument of some kind encumbering the Note, because, again according to the government's own definitions in the Code.

Title 15, U.S.C. Sec. 1602 creditor...a person "to whom the debt arising from the consumer credit transaction is initially payable on the face of the evidence of indebtedness or, if there is no such evidence of indebtedness, by agreement."

Now that I think about it, this may go even deeper...like the original Security Instrument encumbering the Certificate of Live Birth may be our unchallenged assumption of being the Debtor in any legally defined "transaction", which would explain the need to nullify these contracts prior to attempting to settle all debts...

I believe this is also a key to how this stuff is legal! If the bank (or whoever receives the Note) has an unpaid balance of money or its equivalent (again, the Note is the legal equivalent of money, it is a form of "currency") for which it has given or is obligated to give CREDIT, then YOU are the Creditor in this equation, and NOT the debtor...unless...
YOU AGREE TO BE THE DEBTOR! Which I believe is where the UCC-1 Financing Statement comes in. Because up to that point, and with every contract we sign in commerce, we are AGREEING to be the debtor, which is perfectly legal when evidence of indebtedness is missing (which it will be, since there can be no evidence that YOU are the debtor)...

Rump, do you follow me on this or am I way off in your opinion?

[rumpelstilzchen]

Sorry, mate I'm in England, which is where I assumed robbo is.

[mfrey0118]

Sorry, mate I'm in England, which is where I assumed robbo is.

OK, but our system is derived from English law...so they can't be all that dissimilar...does your law have definitions of "deposit" and "Creditor"? Does the UK not have it's own derivative of the Uniform Commercial Code?

[robbo95]

Thanks everyone.

I took the mobile contract out in 2003 over the phone long distance so it was verbal contract no signature nor a credit check.

I work for o2 uk, so know the T&C's. It does stat that o2 may pass to collect any outstanding amounts "owed" through a 3rd party collection agency.

Any contract I had was with o2 not LP1.

I sent them the mail in-regards to no contact unless they do supply me with a signed agreement with them, as per the latter they sent, it states under act ..... 1925 no signed contract needed, I assume they mean with o2 not them as they are a 3rd party and could be anyone.

I'll mail them again requesting any agreement that i owe them the money

once again thanks

[scottishryan]

You have to remember within the original contract there will be a clause which states should robbo default, he agrees the debt may be assigned to a third party. robbo would have signed this contract and be bound by it.
Lowell have explained correctly in their response why (contractually) they are able to persue this debt, through the civil courts if they so wish. They have also provided robbo with a Notice of Assignment previously.

Bullshit!!

I have seen off at least 15 debt collectors and when pursued for the original contract the fold like a pack of cards.

Ask for documentation under Civil Procedures act to give an equal legal footing and watch what happens. Its a legal right and a must for such claims by third parties or original companies for that matter.

I asked 2 Banks for such and they sold the debt rather than provide documentation...I think questions need to be asked. It makes little or no sense.

Please folks...don't listen to me or some of the pish posted...do some research and utilise your legal right and see what happens when you ask for proof, documentation and full transparency. I hate to see folk shafted!! :mad:

[theabominablephenomenon]

I hate to see folk shafted!! :mad:

Shafting them is better!
:D

[robbo95]

Shafting them is better!
:D

You couldn't resist could you haha:D

Ryan, thanks mate. I'm going to throw all act's and sections at them now via email and will look forward to their response.:p

[rumpelstilzchen]

I took the mobile contract out in 2003 over the phone long distance so it was verbal contract no signature nor a credit check.

Whether it was an oral or verbal contract you are still bound to its conditions.

[killmicrosoft]

Whether it was an oral or verbal contract you are still bound to its conditions.

Very hard to prove a verbal CONtract and isn't oral the same as verbal as both are spoken

[rumpelstilzchen]

Very hard to prove a verbal CONtract

I doubt it.
Unlike an oral contract very often a verbal contract is written.

[killmicrosoft]

I doubt it.
Unlike an oral contract very often a verbal contract is written.

now that is not true is it

1 verbal
communicated in the form of words; "verbal imagery"; "a verbal protest"

2 verbal
prolix; "you put me to forget a lady's manners by being so verbal"- Shakespeare

3 verbal
relating to or having facility in the use of words; "a good poet is a verbal artist"; "a merely verbal writer who sacrifices content to sound"; "verbal aptitude"

4 verbal
expressed in spoken words; "a verbal contract"

5 verbal
of or relating to or formed from a verb; "verbal adjectives like `running' in `hot and cold running water'"

6 verbal
of or relating to or formed from words in general; "verbal ability"




1 oral
a stage in psychosexual development when the child's interest is concentrated in the mouth; fixation at this stage is said to result in dependence, selfishness, and aggression

2 oral
of or involving the mouth or mouth region or the surface on which the mouth is located; "the oral cavity"; "the oral mucous membrane"; "the oral surface of a starfish"

3 oral, unwritten
using speech rather than writing; "an oral tradition"; "an oral agreement"

4 oral
of or relating to or affecting or for use in the mouth; "oral hygiene"; "an oral thermometer"; "an oral vaccine"

[he said it was brasso]

Whether it was an oral or verbal contract you are still bound to its conditions.

I assume you mean written or oral contract. The latter is much harder to prove and often gets companies in a pickle particularly when proof of the terms and conditions etc from the time the service was offered are requested.

Written contracts are also difficult to prove if documentation is missing

[rumpelstilzchen]

now that is not true is it
Yes it is.
Go and study some contract law.
I assume you mean written or oral contract.
I meant what I said.

[killmicrosoft]

Yes it is.
Go and study some contract law.

I meant what I said.

i have/and am, and you are talking utter c*@p

[scottishryan]

i have/and am, and you are talking utter c*@p

Ignore him buddy, he likes to give the impression he knows it all and that subjects such as this is his forte. He is purely here (with others) to derail and re-route such topics...now whether this is part of a pre-determined plan, as Randi debunking gang member, Troll or just to be a smart arse,,,we will just need to surmise :rolleyes:

There is no testing and truth like living such and gaining pure experience and personal evidence. Regardless of what text book they reads, what materialistic belief system is held or how conflicted their ego is with programming they will not ever in a million years back down and say "I may be wrong" NEVER

Its a game, its thee game and they are all playing it... don't be enlisted into it as it then becomes chase tail time and distraction with arguments and heated debates while time could be spent on full analytical discussions and building of real hypothesis to make the change we wish to see and share. That they fear the most ;)

[mfrey0118]

It seems to me, as I try to break down the definition of "deposit" in U.S.C., the Note is proof of payment, and the Instrument of Indebtedness that must be exchanged for it, would actually rest with him and not the company. Check out the definition in the law:

12 U.S.C. 1813, sub (i) paragraph (1)


Ok, I bolded the parts that are relevant, because there were many "or"s.

Notice, that a deposit is a result of a transaction here. When the "bank" or whatever company you are contracting with, accepts any type of promise to pay from you, they exchange it for the "instrument of indebtedness". I believe this may be why it is necessary to ask for it. Because by law they don't have it! All they have is your promise to pay, right?

Ok, so how is this significant? It's right in the Code! The promise to pay MUST BE REGARDED AS THE EQUIVALENT OF MONEY (CURRENCY) when it is exchanged for the I.O.D.!
This lines up perfectly with the history of Bills of Exchange. THEY ARE CURRENCY!
What is a dollar? It's a signed promissory note! Why do you think the Fed only pursues people who try to recreate FRNs? Because they are attempting to engage in contract fraud! But if someone creates their own promissory note, with their own signature, they will never be charged with forgery.

So, the promissory note IS the payment, the bank accepts this AS A DEPOSIT by definition! It's an "unpaid balance". Owed to who? Whoever received the Instrument of Indebtedness in exchange for the promissory note. Which would be you!
The problem? There's always a Security Instrument of some kind encumbering the Note, because, again according to the government's own definitions in the Code.


Now that I think about it, this may go even deeper...like the original Security Instrument encumbering the Certificate of Live Birth may be our unchallenged assumption of being the Debtor in any legally defined "transaction", which would explain the need to nullify these contracts prior to attempting to settle all debts...

I believe this is also a key to how this stuff is legal! If the bank (or whoever receives the Note) has an unpaid balance of money or its equivalent (again, the Note is the legal equivalent of money, it is a form of "currency") for which it has given or is obligated to give CREDIT, then YOU are the Creditor in this equation, and NOT the debtor...unless...
YOU AGREE TO BE THE DEBTOR! Which I believe is where the UCC-1 Financing Statement comes in. Because up to that point, and with every contract we sign in commerce, we are AGREEING to be the debtor, which is perfectly legal when evidence of indebtedness is missing (which it will be, since there can be no evidence that YOU are the debtor)...

Rump, do you follow me on this or am I way off in your opinion?
OK so no one in the U.S. can confirm/deny that I am looking at this correctly? I'm fairly new to this and I want to make sure I don't run off half-cocked, in the wrong direction.

[robbo95]

Ok, got a rersponse to my mails

Here is the mail I sent

To whom it may concern.

I write to inform you, that you have now breeched the harassment code
Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act.
If you like to know what this means here is a breakdown of the act;

S40 Punishment for unlawful harassment of debtors.

1. A person commits an offence if, with the object of coercing another
person to pay money claimed from the other as a debt due under a
contract he-
* harasses the other with demands for payment which, in respect of
their frequency, or the manner or occasion of making any such demand,
or of any threat or publicity by which any demand is accompanied, are
calculated to subject him or members of his family or household to
alarm, distress or humiliation;
* falsely represents, in relation to the money claimed, that criminal
proceedings lie for failure to pay it;
* falsely represents himself to be authorised in some official
capacity to claim or enforce payment; or
* utters a document falsely represented by him to have some official
character, or purporting to have some official character which he know
it has not.
2. A person may be guilty of an offence by virtue of sub-section (1)
(a) above if he concerts with others in the taking of such actions as
is described in that paragraph, notwithstanding that his own course of
conduct does not by itself amount to harassment.”

Also a break in Data protection, as my request for you to destroy any
of my details has been totally ignored.
These offences have now be collected and passed to the relevant
bodies’ i.e. The Information Commissioner for Data Protection

This is in-regards to my email sent and received by your self’s on the
17/09/2010 at 17:13

Here is the context of that email;
Dear Sirs,

Please read the following notice thoroughly and carefully before
responding. It is a notice. It informs you. It means what it says.

I refer to your letter.

As you are a third party intervener in this matter acting without
authority, I DO NOT give you permission to interfere in my commercial
affairs as you have no legal standing. I do not have a contract with
you and any permission that you believe you may have from me is hereby
withdrawn. If you believe that you have power of attorney to act on my
behalf you are hereby fired, and any consent that you believe you may
have, tacit or otherwise, is hereby withdrawn.

I am familiar with the terms of Section 40 of the Administration of
Justice Act 1970, and the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. And I
believe, should you continue in contacting me after my request for you
to cease your activity, that you will be guilty of harassment and
blackmail, and you will be in breach of these acts, and you will be
reported to the relevant bodies.

I am well aware of Section 40, sub-section (3) which you may consider
entitles you to proceed. However upon full commercial liability and
penalty of perjury you will need to supply the following Proofs of
Claims:

1. Proof of Claim that your actions are reasonable.

2. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part is due, or believed
by you to be due to you, and not to some other party.

3a. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part is to yourself by
providing sight of the appropriate contract, or

3b. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part to persons for whom
you act by providing sight of the appropriate contract.

4. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part protects you from any
future loss.

5. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part is enforcement of a
legal process on a Human Being under Common Law jurisdiction, who
cannot possibly have such liability under said jurisdiction.

You would of course need to provide these Proofs, including showing
the full and audited accounting, if you chose to go to law.

Please also note that if you contact me by telephone, after a formal
request not to, you will also be in breach of the Wireless Telegraphy
Act (1949) and, as such, I will report you to both Trading Standards
and The Office of Fair Trading. And take further note that continued
telephone calls after the receipt of a request not to call may
constitute a criminal offence under Section 127 of the Communications
Act 2003.

Finally, you do not, nor have you ever had, my permission to use or
process my personal data in any way, and so pursuant to the Data
Protection Act 1998, I hereby demand that you cease use of any and all
data with regard to me, and that you immediately destroy all of my data
held on your records. Failure to do so will result in a report being
submitted to The Information Commissioner for Data Protection
breaches.

You will be deemed to have been served notice of my request and I will
deem it served three (3) days from the date of this letter. This has
been sent by recorded delivery. I am advising you that any
communications from you including but not limited to letters, phone
calls and text messages received after this date will be recorded/noted
with the intention of them being used as evidence.

Do not contact me again.

The letter dated the 20/09/2010 demanding full payment within 5 days
and your latest letter dated the 21/10/2010 now constitutes my demands
have been basely ignored.

In your latest letter, it states that you will seek a full breakdown
on the account from the said company: o2 UK. This is fine!
As I stated in my email dated 17/09/2010 there where another 5
requests for you to for fill namely
1. Proof of Claim that your actions are reasonable.

2. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part is due, or believed
by you to be due to you, and not to some other party.

3a. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part is to yourself by
providing sight of the appropriate contract, or

3b. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part to persons for whom
you act by providing sight of the appropriate contract.

4. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part protects you from any
future loss.

5. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part is enforcement of a
legal process on a Human Being under Common Law jurisdiction, who
cannot possibly have such liability under said jurisdiction.

I also refer to the section in your letter dated 21/10/210 stating the
“Notice of the assignment of debt” this being in accordance to the Law
of property act 1925 S136.
The debt was not assigned to yourself(s), you purchased the debt
(dispute) from o2 so there could be NO assignment of debt via S136 of
the LOP act 1925
And your poor excuse i.e. a signed agreement and under the Consumer
Credit Act 1974, I was referring to the agreement between me and your
self(s) That i owe this debt to you.
Please take this as my final demand that you adhere to my requests,
the only contact I would like from yourself(s) is conformation that you
have destroyed my details! I do expect this within the next 7 days.

I look forward your reply

Without prejudice

AND HERE IS THEIR RESPONSE


Dear Mr Fairhurst,



Thank you for your recent email communication. We must apologise for the delay in our response.



We are sorry you think that we have breached the Harassment Code and Data Protection Act, we can advise that this is certainly not the case. All of our procedures comply with the regulations and codes of practice laid down for the industry within which we operate our business.



Your comments have been noted and we can advise that our letter of assignment sent to you on 2 March 2009 is sufficient to make the sale of debt effective under the Law of Property Act 1925, giving us entitlement to collect this debt. Our Consumer Credit License is shown at the foot of this letterhead.



We can advise that there is no contract between Lowell Portfolio 1 and you. The agreement that effectively makes you liable for the debt is between you and O2 (UK) Limited. When you signed your contract with O2 (UK) Limited you agreed to their terms and conditions; an element of which stated that your account and personal details may be passed on to debt collection agencies should you fail to adhere to their Terms and Conditions.



At the point of purchase of this debt Lowell Portfolio 1 Limited became the data controller in respect of this matter replacing O2 (UK) Limited, from whom the debt was purchased in accordance with the Data Protection Act. Consequently, as the legal owner of the debt Lowell Portfolio 1 Limited retains the right to process your personal data. Lowell Portfolio I Ltd are therefore, not prepared to cease processing your data in respect of the debt on the basis this is required for the performance of a contract to which you are a party.



In our letter to you dated 21 October 2010, we advised you that we had placed your account on hold whilst we requested copies of your account statements. we would advise that there is no legal obligation that states we must send the information you requested within a certain time period.



We have requested a copy of the statements from the original creditor and will forward them to yourself once we are in receipt.



Please be advised that as we do not hold copies of the statements within our offices, we cannot state a time period in which these will be received. We can confirm that your account is still on hold.



We must advise that this is not a regulated agreement under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, and therefore our client has no obligation to provide a signed agreement under the provisions of the Act.



In the case of mobile contracts, inserting the SIM card and usage of the equipment is taken as acceptance of the terms and conditions of the contract. The requested statements will serve as proof of your acceptance of O2’s terms and conditions.



Should you require any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact one of our Advisors on 0845 300 9416.



Yours sincerely



Samantha Barnard

Customer Services

How does the Law of Property Act 1925 work? Also the T&C's would have been form 2003

Any help would be great

[robbo95]

Ok, for anyone interested. I had a good look around and this is what I found.

I have now replied to the above email with this

Dear Customer services Rep,

Thank you for your email, the contents of which are noted. I must draw
your attention to the fact that this account is subject to a serious
dispute.

On the 17/09/2010 at 17:13 I wrote to your company requesting that you
provide a copy of the written contract, in this case the credit
agreement upon which this debt, which you claim a right to recover is
based. You will no doubt be aware that this debt is credit as defined
within the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and as a result, pursuant to
section 78(1) of the Act I may demand a copy of the credit agreement at
any time as long as the statutory fee of £1 is paid.

Your response to my request leaves me a little confused, I must point
out that it would appear that you have mis interpreted the law as your
response has major inaccuracies within it "Law Of Property 1925"

Secondly, you state that you are not the original creditor nor did you
provide the original credit facility. Now then, either way, you have a
duty to ensure that the correct documentation is provided.

If you are assigned a debt and the assignment is absolute, it would
come within section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925. Now surely you
will be aware of the definition of “Creditor” within the consumer
credit Act 1974, section 189(1) of the CCA 1974 states

"creditor " means the person providing credit under a consumer credit
agreement or the person to whom his rights and duties under the
agreement have passed by assignment or operation of law, and in
relation to a prospective consumer credit agreement, includes the
prospective creditor

Therefore if you are claiming that the assignment is absolute you have
the same duties as were placed upon the original creditor and MUST
supply me on demand with a true copy of the original agreement.
However, if you purport that the assignment is merely equitable and not
absolute I.e. you have the rights but none of the responsibilities
under the agreement, then I draw your attention to section 175 of the
CCA 1974

175.Duty of persons deemed to be agents.

Where under this Act a person is deemed to receive a notice or payment
as agent of the creditor or owner under a regulated agreement, he shall
be deemed to be under a contractual duty to the creditor or owner to
transmit the notice, or remit the payment, to him forthwith

So clearly, you would have a duty to pass my statutory request on to
**CREDITOR** for them to supply the information, I would like to point
out that the OFT guidelines on debt collection make it clear that all
collection activities should cease while a reasonably disputed debt is
investigated.

Also since you cannot provide a copy of the credit agreement, this
debt becomes unenforceable in law, furthermore, any rights to process
my personal data and defame my credit file would be contained within
the written contract, the contract which you do not appear to have!

I'm sure I don’t need to go over the vast amount of case law that has
been before the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords but I will
outline the facts from the Judgment of LORD NICHOLLS OF BIRKENHEAD in
the House of Lords Wilson v First County Trust Ltd - [2003] All ER (D)
187 (Jul)
29. The court's powers under section 127(1) are subject to significant
qualification in two types of cases. The first type is where section 61
(1)(a), regarding signing of agreements, is not complied with. In such
cases the court 'shall not make' an enforcement order unless a
document, whether or not in the prescribed form, containing all the
prescribed terms, was signed by the debtor: section 127(3). Thus,
signature of a document containing all the prescribed terms is an
essential prerequisite to the court's power to make an enforcement
order.

Clearly No Credit Agreement, containing the prescribed terms as per
Consumer Credit Agreements Regulations 1983 Schedule 6 Column 2 and
signed by the debtor, that can be produced before the court means the
court cannot enforce the debt. This is mirrored in the following
cases….

Wilson and another v. Hurstanger Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 299

London North Securities Ltd & Mr and Mrs. Meadows [2005] EWCA Civ
956,

Dimond v. Lovell - [2000] Q.B. 216,

Rankine v Barclays Bank Plc [2005]

I'm sure your legal department will be aware of these cases, but
should they not be fully conversant, then I can provide copies of the
judgments


To clarify my position

I do not have any debt with your organisation, I do not acknowledge
any debt with your organisation and I shall not enter into any
negotiations to settle any debt you claim I have with your
organisation.

Until such time that you can produce before me a copy of the credit
agreement containing the prescribed terms in the prescribed form
bearing my signature, I will not discuss this matter further. Further
more, I put you on notice that any further attempts to collect this
debt or any harassment by your company to coerce me into paying you
monies before you provide me the documents that I requested, then I
shall issue you a letter before claim, complying with the pre action
protocol Para 4.3 placing you on notice that I will be issuing
proceedings in the Cheshire County Court against your organisation
seeking a judicial ruling pursuant to section 142(1) of the CCA 1974 to
determine the validity of this debt. I must point out that the court
has the power to discharge a debtor from their obligations under
section 142 and I am advised that any action that I could bring under
that section has an excellent prospect of success as the facts stand
and furthermore I would ask the court to consider costs in this matter.

I again invite you to provide access to the original agreement showing
that it contains the prescribed terms and is signed by both the
original creditor and myself. If you are unable to do so, then I would
invite you to give consideration to writing the balance off and closing
the account.

I am mindful of the fact that litigation would lead to added costs and
time on both sides and therefore I urge you to consider this situation
and act accordingly, from the advice I have received it is clear to me
that I have a good prospect of success based upon these arguments and I
do not wish to have to press this issue before the courts unless
totally necessary.

I respectfully request a response to this email within 7 days setting
out your position

Regards

I'll post any response if any.

[interdimensional]

http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/