Re: HSBC advice please.

by **daveiron** Sat Dec 30, 2023 9:35 pm

Well done, Of course they have only dropped their threat because they are such kind & caring folk.
Keep researching ,you cannot have too much knowledge .

by Trishiapp28 Sun Dec 31, 2023 7:12 am

Thank you daveiron. Yeah, they seem like such kind souls, not!

For sure, acquiring knowledge diminished my anxiety and fear. Once I let both go, I arrived at ‘ you can’t touch me’ frame of mind.

It started with finding this site & interacting with kind & knowledgeable people like you. Massive thank you for starting & supporting my journey. Onwards & upwards

by **Lopsum** Sun Dec 31, 2023 12:35 pm

Well done Trisha ! cheers

ps; any chance you can upload the letter for prosperity's sake? I will move this to the success section!!

by Trishiapp28 Mon Jan 01, 2024 7:49 pm

Hi Lopsum.

Tried to upload the letter, but it keeps coming up with a message that I exceeded ‘user allowance.’

by Trishiapp28 Sat Feb 10, 2024 12:06 pm

Dear all.

So, it seems Overdaales have not given up, despite their last communication that “ no further legal action will be take on the account.”

Today I received this ( was not able to upload the photo, so I will type it as read:

We write regarding the matter in the left and your letter dated 30th November 2023.

In response to your first question, our client is satisfied the claim is legally enforceable. The debt has been legally assigned from PayPal, as per Notice of Assignment previously provided to you. Our client reiterates that providing you with the Notice of Assignment confirms this specific debt has been assigned, and that our client has not merely bought a list of debts in default.

You ask that we only contact you via Royal Mail. We presume that you mean by post, in which case we confirm we will only contact you this way. If in fact you mean by Royal Mail specifically, it is not open to you to dictate which mail service we use.

We note your suggestion that we must answer your questions under full personal liability. This does not arise, as we are acting on behalf of our client.

Paragraphs (1) and (2) under the Heading Notice of Conditional Acceptance, we have provided you with copies of the Agreement on multiple occasions; however, a further copy has been enclosed for your reference.

In relation to paragraph (3) and (4) no Bill of Exchange or Promissory Note is relevant to this matter.

We note your comments at (5) and (6) however the original agreement is between yourself and PayPal and nobody else. The debt has since been assigned to our client and they are the correct party to issue proceedings against you.

We understand your reference to Van Lynn Developments Ltd v Pelias Constructions Ltd 1968 (3) All 824 and Lord Denning’s orbiter comment’s however, this case was not about the entitlement to a copy of the Deed of Assignment or Debt Sale Agreement but rather the validity of the Notice of Assignment , which, has been discussed above.

At paragraph (7) you refer to Webster v Ridgeway (2009. This case has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on debt or assignment. It was about school’s liability for personal injury caused by an assault on a pupils, where the Court was asked to determine whether a list of pupils must be disclosed.

Please confirm your intentions regarding repayment of the outstanding balance. Should no response be received within 14 days of this letter, a County Court Claim may be issued without further notice, resulting in court fees and legal costs which would increase the balance.

Overdales Solicitors.

This letter is dated 12th of feb so I have 14 days to respond.

I really would appreciate your vast knowledge so that appropriate response is provided.

Of course, I could also ignore it and wait for the County Court Claim to come through and defend it on court.

Thank you very much in advance.

by Trishiapp28 Sat Feb 10, 2024 3:47 pm

Ok, so the mistake I’ve made is that I did not send the fourth Notice to them, thinking that they gave up.

I have rectified this error now, and posting it on Monday

by waylander62 Sat Feb 10, 2024 6:40 pm

Just to recap everything in respect of this ?

what have they actually provided in the form of evidence ?

agreement ?
terms and conditions ?
default notice ?
termination notice ?
notice of assignment x2 1 from the OC and one from the purchaser ?
deed of assignment ?
full statement of account showing how the sums claimed have become due ?

by Trishiapp28 Sat Feb 10, 2024 7:06 pm

Thank you Waylander.

I have received so far:

Electronically signed credit agreement, no ink signature from either me or PayPal. Print out of terms and conditions.

Default notice from Lowell stating that my account was assigned to them on 23/02/23.

PayPal wrote to me to inform me that the outstanding balance was transferred to Lowell on 23/02/23 and that Lowell has been appointed by LPI to manage my account.

After I stupidly ignored Lowell, I received ‘ Notice of Acting’ from Overdales on 23/10/23.

They sent a barely readable print out of some transactions and payments made. No name on it, just address.

What they haven’t provided is Deed of Assignment claiming that “Notice of Assignment confirms this specific debt has been assigned, and that our client has not merely bought a list of debts in default”.

They claim that Lowell has no obligation to provide me with affidavit or a signed bill pursuant to the Bills of Exchange Act 1882. As this debt is not based on and does not arise from a bill of exchange , none can, will or should be provided.

None of their communication has been signed in person.

I will be very grateful for your thoughts/ opinion.

Warmest wishes.

by **Lopsum** Sat Feb 10, 2024 7:20 pm

i would ask them to have a grown up or relevant person look at the notice

by Trishiapp28 Sat Feb 10, 2024 7:24 pm

Honestly Lopsum , very tempted, especially after sending me the previous letter that no further legal action will be taken on the account and now this nonsense.

I will send them the fourth notice on Monday.

by Trishiapp28 Sat Feb 10, 2024 7:30 pm

In my fourth notice I’m intending to quote Maxim 4 of Commercial Law given that none of their letters were signed by a human being.

by waylander62 Sat Feb 10, 2024 9:23 pm

Trishiapp28 wrote:Thank you Waylander.

I have received so far:

Electronically signed credit agreement, no ink signature from either me or PayPal. Print out of terms and conditions.

this would be because you started the agreement online ? no agreement was sent out to you for you to sign ?

Default notice from Lowell stating that my account was assigned to them on 23/02/23.

you are a little confused i think default notice and a notice of assignment are completely different things and both are important. A default notice must be just that a default notice served and written in accordance with the law or could be invalid

PayPal wrote to me to inform me that the outstanding balance was transferred to Lowell on 23/02/23 and that Lowell has been appointed by LPI to manage my account.

this for me will be the interesting one, you need to look closely at this one, is it written on PAYPAL headed paper ? and does it contain a footer detailing paypals co. reg. no. and FCA authorisation no. ? or is it blank with writing only ? Also look along the right edge of the paper does it have distinguishing numbers very similar to all or most of the letters sent out by lowell ? Also Lowell dont buy debt LP1 do but they NEVER chase you for money its always lowell who chase.

After I stupidly ignored Lowell, I received ‘ Notice of Acting’ from Overdales on 23/10/23.

let them act

They sent a barely readable print out of some transactions and payments made. No name on it, just address.

again are these proper statements ? or does it look like anyone could have typed it up ? and by the sounds of it it doesn't show how the outstanding balance has become due and owing, an address but no name what about an account number ?

What they haven’t provided is Deed of Assignment claiming that “Notice of Assignment confirms this specific debt has been assigned, and that our client has not merely bought a list of debts in default”.

a piece of single A4 paper does not prove that the account they are referring to was lawfully assigned giving LP1 any right title or interest in the said account. Also from this 'stupid' statement you can really have a go should it be needed, i can assure you they buy debts in bulk several thousand in one go. For some strange reason they are pretty much stating they bought your debt specifically so if need be we can really ask some awkward questions

They claim that Lowell has no obligation to provide me with affidavit or a signed bill pursuant to the Bills of Exchange Act 1882. As this debt is not based on and does not arise from a bill of exchange , none can, will or should be provided.

never really approached this or dealt with this standard response TBH

None of their communication has been signed in person.

It never is

I will be very grateful for your thoughts/ opinion.

my thoughts are above, by all means send out the notice but i have a feeling that they may well issue a claim regardless i hope i am wrong. If i were you i would send out a full DSAR to paypal straight away if you have not already done so.

Warmest wishes.

by **daveiron** Sat Feb 10, 2024 11:32 pm

I cant believe you did not send the final notice ,you would have had them in a tacit agreement.
Go back and take a look at the notice , read each question again . they are replying with BS ,You require them answered in full .

question 1 they have not answered
2 they have not complied
3 is very relevant apart from everything else its a negotiable instrument ,its been sold
4 confirms 3
5 Bank of England statement is very clear
6 they ignored
7 have they got the original note ? again they ignore
8 If they have original note ,why not arrange an exchange & get paid.
9 The Denning statement quoted is very clear, as with the webster case ( the debtor is entitled to see a redacted version) It clearly states the DEBTOR not this debtor.
ask them if they are making a legal determination
10 you require it answered

The reason they dont want to use RM is because other carriers do not return to sender .Its your choice what carrier you will accept mail from.

by Trishiapp28 Sun Feb 11, 2024 6:35 am

Dear Waylander and Daveiron.

Thank you both for your kind replies, I really appreciate them and take your points on board.

Indeed, daveiron, I was dumb for not sending the final notice. Because they sent that they will no longer take legal action against my account, I stupidly thought they gave up. My mistake , which I shall never ever repeat again. Fourth notice will be coming out on Monday.

Would you ask them whether they are making a legal determination with regards point 9 in the 4th Notice, or shall I send a separate letter to them?

Waylander, I will 100% request DSAR. Will send it on Monday.

You have made some very interesting points around legitimacy of the documents they have sent me. As advised, I will examine them very closely, since anyone could have knocked them out with computer and printer.

Yes, the alleged debt was taken out on line, hence the electronically signed agreement which, yet again, could have been created by anyone.

I have free afternoon today so will spend sometime looking through it with some detail. I will come back with any further/ relevant information as I find it.

They may take me to court, I’m not afraid. I will fight them on it and continue to demand that they prove to me & the judge that this alleged debt is mine.

Thank you yet again.

Warmest wishes.

by **daveiron** Sun Feb 11, 2024 10:22 am

You need to send notice 4, but you will need to re-jig it as they have addressed some points. Where they address points 1 & 2 ,you required a certified copy
not a photo copy anybody could just pass off.

Para 3/4 it is a promissory note a negotiable instrument ,if its not a negotiable instrument ,why have they purchased it ?
The Denning judgement is caselaw and you are entitled to view it . see the second link here and quote the case
https://goodf.forumotion.com/t6108-deed-of-assignments?highlight=deed+of+assignment

Para 7 I would argue the point the judgement states 'the debtor is entitled to see a redacted --' ask if they are making a legal determination . Why would it be only this debtor ? if it applies to one it must apply to all regardless what the case is about.

Dont forget they have ignored your questions about the exchange of payment for the original agreement ,so you may cancel it.
You asked if they hold the Original agreement ,they ignored that as well ,because they do not have it.

Plenty more you can add ,

by Trishiapp28 Sun Feb 11, 2024 10:34 am

Brilliant! Thank you daveiron. I will add those points to the fourth notice this afternoon , as well as take a closer look at the documents they have sent to me.

If something looks suspicious, I will bring it up here.

Have a lovely Sunday.

by **Lopsum** Sun Feb 11, 2024 11:35 am

At paragraph (7) you refer to Webster v Ridgeway (2009. This case has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on debt or assignment. It was about school’s liability for personal injury caused by an assault on a pupils, where the Court was asked to determine whether a list of pupils must be disclosed.

you could correct them here too , the case may have been brought about by assault but the judgement made was about the right to inspect data.
they cant even use google the first result i see states "The High Court has recently handed down an interesting judgment on the extent to which redacted personal data contained in documents disclosed in the course of litigation was vulnerable to inspection. The judgment also highlights some of the limits which may be placed on parties seeking inspection of databases containing personal data.".
A child with a packet of crayons could have made a better fob-off retort.

by Trishiapp28 Sun Feb 11, 2024 12:48 pm

Oh my lord!

As per Waylander’s advice, I checked the supposed PayPal letter. Would you believe it ( I’m sure you do) the side numbers are exactly as Lowell’s!! There are no other PayPal details apart from Lowell’s account reference & PO Box number! They have committed fraud because they used PayPal as a header in the left hand side and signed it off as PayPal Credit!

by Trishiapp28 Sun Feb 11, 2024 12:52 pm

I compared it to official PayPal letters and nothing matches. I am fuming that I almost fell for this sh&t!!

by Trishiapp28 Sun Feb 11, 2024 1:21 pm

The fraudulent letter says:

We are writing to you that as of the 23/02/23 your PayPal account from PayPal Europe Sarl & CIE SCA along with the outstanding balance was transferred to Lowell Portfolio I Ltd ( LPI). Lowell Financial Ltd has been appointed by LPI to manage your account.

By way of confirmation, as you did not comply with the requirements of the default notice we sent to you previously, by making payment of the outstanding arrears by the date specified in the notice , your PayPal Credit agreement terminated with effect from 22/02/23 and the full balance referred to above remains due and outstanding.

In the past you have been contacted by PayPal Europe Sarl &CIE SCA or one of our partners in relation to your outstanding balance. We have now transferred your PayPal Credit account to Lowell. All contact regarding your account will now be with Lowell Financial Ltd.

PO Box 13079
Harlow
CM209TE

Lowell’s phone number.

Signed

PayPal Credit.

Side numbers matching Lowell’s other letters: LOW110_060323_3779938_MACHINE/83906/182851/3of4.

In contrast PayPal has very different side letter numbers with all info authorised and regulated by Financial Authority.

by Trishiapp28 Sun Feb 11, 2024 1:26 pm

Comparing the two, even the PayPal header in the left hand side corner does not match!

Now, the question is… what do I do with this information? I am very tempered to send a the fraudulent copy to Overdale’s and inform them of their actions and that they have been found out and that I intend to make a complaint to Financial Conduct Authority. Your guidance would be very much appreciated.

Warmest wishes.

by flyingfish Sun Feb 11, 2024 4:14 pm

Trishiapp28 wrote:At paragraph (7) you refer to Webster v Ridgeway (2009. This case has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on debt or assignment. It was about school’s liability for personal injury caused by an assault on a pupils, where the Court was asked to determine whether a list of pupils must be disclosed.

What was the argument that this case reference was intended to support?

by Trishiapp28 Sun Feb 11, 2024 4:18 pm

My entitlement to view redacted copy of the Deed of Assignment.

by **Lopsum** Sun Feb 11, 2024 6:22 pm

Probably because they often use the excuse of it contains private data to not show any evidence of it at all.
the case supports the redacting of personal info but still be able to present the evidence in a fair way.

by flyingfish Sun Feb 11, 2024 9:06 pm

Trishiapp28 wrote:My entitlement to view redacted copy of the Deed of Assignment.

Ok. It's not particularly relevant to that point though, is it? In that case there was no issue about providing redacted documents, Ridgeway had already done so. Ideally for case law you want a case where the parties disagree on the point you're concerned with, and the judge ruled in a way that supports your position. That's the only sort of case that sets a precedent.

If you read the actual judgement you'll see that firstly there was no dispute about providing redacted documents. Secondly the claimant's application for unredacted copies failed, although there were some minor concessions.

by Sponsored content