A question about : Is this fair?
Hi all,
I am a new poster etc, although I have scoured these boards many times in the past to get advice.
I have a problem that has arisen today.
I took out a couple of a Provident loans in 2012 but then moved house and the agent I had got fired for 'fiddling the takings'.
I never heard anything from Provident and to be honest, to my own silly failings, did not contact them as had a lot of personal issues going on - the loss of a baby and some surgery around that. This is by no means an excuse, just simply a reason why the debt was not forefront in my mind.
Anyway, fast forward to this year and hubby and I are thinking of getting a new mortgage (we've returned to our house after years of renting), as I am expecting and we have no room for everyone once bubba comes along.
I looked on my credit file, via Noddle, and saw these provident debts sat there. So I willingly rang them, explained the situation with the move and their agent, but would they take weekly payments to clear these debts as I want them cleared.
Yes, not a problem. Weekly payment arrangement set up for each Thursday.
This arrangement went on for a couple of months and then I noticed they had stopped taking payments.
I phoned them up to be told my debt had been sold to Lowell. It's not a debt collection agency she protests on the phone! Errrr I beg to differ. This is just what I need when I'm 4 months pregnant! 
My question is - are they allowed to do this if I have been paying and we had a payment arrangement between us?
Any advice would be greatly received.
Thank you 
Best answers:
- Yes they are allowed to.
- Seems pretty low tactics if someone is paying.
Lesson learnt for me!
Thank you for the reply. - It's not personal. They just get sold off in a job lot with other loans.
- You can set up the same payment plan with Lowell, online, from there website, no need to even speak to them, 99% of the time they are accepted without much question.
- I look forward to hearing from Lowell then - one company I do not like the look of.
- 268 reads