Cabot County Court Claim Form

[tomterm8]

Originally Posted by joghuj

Particulars are;
The claimant is part of the Cabot Financial Group and has purchased the debt(s) scheduled below. Despite requests for payment the defendant has failed to pay the sum of £XX in relation to the defendant's
Royal bank of Scotland Visa account xx
Barclaycard Visa account xx
And the claimant claims: the sum of £XX together with interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984; and costs

i take it both amounts are under £25,000?

(I've edited the defence slightly).

[joghuj]

Yes, both under £25,000. Thanks for the help again.

[joghuj]

I was thinking of adding something to the defence mentioning the fact that Hodsons didn't contact me threatening court action until after the court claim was issued! Would there be any benefit in this or not, something along these lines;

"The Claimant’s solicitor also failed to provide the Defendant with a proper notice of Court Proceedings. A letter dated 29th May 2007 from Hodsons Solicitors was received by the defendant on the 7th June. This letter requested payment within 7 days from letter date or Court proceedings will be issued. The County Court claim had already been received by the defendant, however, issued and received on the 1st June. There was, therefore, no possibility for the defendant to contact the Claimants solicitor prior to Court proceedings."

[tomterm8]

Originally Posted by joghuj

I was thinking of adding something to the defence mentioning the fact that Hodsons didn't contact me threatening court action until after the court claim was issued! Would there be any benefit in this or not, something along these lines;

"The Claimant’s solicitor also failed to provide the Defendant with a proper notice of Court Proceedings. A letter dated 29th May 2007 from Hodsons Solicitors was received by the defendant on the 7th June. This letter requested payment within 7 days from letter date or Court proceedings will be issued. The County Court claim had already been received by the defendant, however, issued and received on the 1st June. There was, therefore, no possibility for the defendant to contact the Claimants solicitor prior to Court proceedings."

I would write:

"The claimant failed to provide me with proper notice of proceedings, in order to investigate this claim. On 29th May 2007 from Hodsons Solicitors was received by the defendant on the 7th June. This letter requested payment within 7 days from letter date or Court proceedings will be issued.

This letter was not in the prescribed form for a default notice under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, and did not give the proper notice period required in such a default notice. In any case, despite giving 7 days notice to rectify any alleged default, the Claimant issued its claim on or before 1st June.

Point 4.3(c) of the pre-trial protocols states that the claimant
"
ask for a prompt acknowledgement of the letter, followed by a full written response within a reasonable stated period;


(For many claims, a normal reasonable period for a full response may be one month.) "

and Point 4.3(a) and 4.3(b) require that such a letter:

"4.3 The claimant's letter should –
(a)give sufficient concise details to enable the recipient to understand and investigate the claim without extensive further information;
(b)enclose copies of the essential documents which the claimant relies on;"


No opportunity was given to me to investigate the claim. Further, the claimant failure to provide a copy of the credit agreement both with the initial claim letter, and after a reasonable request for disclosure despite its apparent statutory duty under the consumer credit act 1974 to provide the credit agreement or , if not the creditor, to request that the creditor supplies the credit agreement and to abide by the OFT Debt Collection Guidance which states that they must halt collection procedures while investigating a reasonable dispute.

The failure of the Claimant to abide by the process set out in the Pre-Action Protocols has made it impossible for me to investigate the matter, and has caused substantial prejudice to myself in that it has caused potentially unnecessary court proceedings and associated costs. It is therefore requested that the court use its discretionary powers under the civil procedure rules to set aside any request by the Claimant for costs in this matter and to award damages to compensate for any prejudice the court believes the claimants actions has caused me.

[joghuj]

Nice one Tomterm, worded just a bit better than mine! Do you think I should send copies of any correspondance with this defence or not?

[tomterm8]

Originally Posted by joghuj

Nice one Tomterm, worded just a bit better than mine! Do you think I should send copies of any correspondance with this defence or not?

I believe you submit it latter, with your court bundle.

[tomterm8]

Originally Posted by joghuj

Thanks for the encouragement Bbcoops, hopefully mine will go down the same path.

This morning I received this letter from Cabot, I think I've read similar stuff in other threads. The letter is addressed and signed from Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited, although refers to Cabot Financial (UK) Limited.

Any advice please anyone? I need to have my defense with the court by next Tuesday.

Thanks

We refer to the above referenced account.

Cabot Financial (UK) Limited, formerly Kings Hill (No. 1) Limited, which is part of the Cabot Financial group of companies, purchased your account from Barclaycard and therefore Cabot Financial (UK) Limited is the legal owner.

The rights but not the duties were assigned to Cabot Financial (UK) Limited in dealing with your account and therefore we are legally entitled to collect.

We will assist you in providing a copy of the agreement and statement of account but please note that we are not obliged to as we are not the creditor. In view of the fact that we are not the creditor we are also returning the fee of £1.00 to you as this is not applicable.

We will also arrange for a copy of the Notice of Assignment to be forwarded to you. This letter constitutes written notice of the assignment under Section 25 of the Law of Property Act and therefore we have no need to provide a copy of the assignment deed itself.

Finally, we would advise that you are misconceived and misadvised when suggesting that non-compliance with your request would be a criminal offence; the agreement would merely be unenforceable.

Yours Sincerely
Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited

Oh, yes, also this recorded delivery

In the matter of XXX Vs YYY
Claim Number XXX
In COURT NAME

DCA ADDRESS

YOUR ADDRESS

Dear Mr XXX,

I refer to your letter dated XXX, a copy of which is enclosed.

Please note that s25 of the Law of property act 1925 was repealed on 1.1.1997 ( I refer you to ch. 1996 c. 47, s. 25(2), Sch.4 (with ss. 24(2), 25(4)); S.I. 1996/2974, art. 2 ) .

I ask you under what right as an alleged equitable owner you pursue this claim, and refer you to the definition of owner for the purpose of the act as defined by s189(1) of The consumer Credit Act 1974.

Yours Sincerly,

Your Name. (Type, don't sign. Centre & bold the header).

ENC - letter dated X.

[joghuj]

Cheers, I've just sent the defence off Special next day. I'll get this one to Cabot tomorrow.

[joghuj]

Originally Posted by tomterm8

Oh, yes, also this recorded delivery

In the matter of XXX Vs YYY
Claim Number XXX
In COURT NAME

DCA ADDRESS

YOUR ADDRESS

Dear Mr XXX,

I refer to your letter dated XXX, a copy of which is enclosed.

Please note that s25 of the Law of property act 1925 was repealed on 1.1.1997 ( I refer you to ch. 1996 c. 47, s. 25(2), Sch.4 (with ss. 24(2), 25(4)); S.I. 1996/2974, art. 2 ) .

I ask you under what right as an alleged equitable owner you pursue this claim, and refer you to the definition of owner for the purpose of the act as defined by s189(1) of The consumer Credit Act 1974.

Yours Sincerly,

Your Name. (Type, don't sign. Centre & bold the header).

ENC - letter dated X.

Tomterm, just so that I get the presentation correct as it may be important. DCA address, that's the court address or Cabot? This letter is sent to Cabot directly I presume?
And centre and bold just this part?
In the matter of XXX Vs YYY
Claim Number XXX
In COURT NAME

Sorry to ask simple questions but I'm getting a bit nervous about things now that the court is involved.

[joghuj]

Just been reading another thread and realised that "DCA" in this case is Cabot, think I'm OK with this letter now thanks.

[tomterm8]

Originally Posted by joghuj

Tomterm, just so that I get the presentation correct as it may be important. DCA address, that's the court address or Cabot? This letter is sent to Cabot directly I presume?
And centre and bold just this part?
In the matter of XXX Vs YYY
Claim Number XXX
In COURT NAME

Sorry to ask simple questions but I'm getting a bit nervous about things now that the court is involved.

Yep. Change the XXX's etc and court name as appropriate.

[NitrousOxide]

Hi,
I don't have a debt with Cabot.
Yet it's really irritating me and quite frankly weeing me off all this "Rights but not duties".
First if you are not the creditor cabot then by your definition they cannot be a debtor.
Secondly for you to sue it has to be absolute assignment, for it to be absolute you would have to have the rights and obligations.

I really hope a debt of mine gets sold to them. Grrrrr.

[joghuj]

Originally Posted by NitrousOxide

Hi,
I don't have a debt with Cabot.
Yet it's really irritating me and quite frankly weeing me off all this "Rights but not duties".
First if you are not the creditor cabot then by your definition they cannot be a debtor.
Secondly for you to sue it has to be absolute assignment, for it to be absolute you would have to have the rights and obligations.

I really hope a debt of mine gets sold to them. Grrrrr.

I imagine something along those lines would be going into my proper defence when that time comes. What exactly are they trying to say with 'rights but not duties' anyway? What are the duties in this context?

[Seahorse]

As I understand it, the LOP Act anyway is defined as...

An Act to consolidate the enactments relating to Conveyancing and the Law of Property in England and Wales.

In other words, they can shove it if they try to enforce a debt assigned to them in this way, in Scotland? Yes?

In which case, they surely have shot themselves in the foot by their insistence that THIS is the law that they will rely on to prove theyown the debt. Because if it is true, I intend to advise the local press of the fact, so that ALL their Scottish "customers" can collectively tell them to FECK OFF!!!

[tomterm8]

Originally Posted by Seahorse

As I understand it, the LOP Act anyway is defined as...

An Act to consolidate the enactments relating to Conveyancing and the Law of Property in England and Wales.

In other words, they can shove it if they try to enforce a debt assigned to them in this way, in Scotland? Yes?

In which case, they surely have shot themselves in the foot by their insistence that THIS is the law that they will rely on to prove theyown the debt. Because if it is true, I intend to advise the local press of the fact, so that ALL their Scottish "customers" can collectively tell them to FECK OFF!!!

s. 209.
Short title, commencement, and extent.
— (1) This Act may be cited as the Law of Property Act, 1925.

(2) . . . .repealed

(3) This Act extends to England and Wales only.