Not sure if this has been posted already but I can't find anything on the search function.

If anyone was wondering why there seems to have been a sudden burst of activity from big Al and his cronies then they may like to take a look at the last three entries on this document and draw their own conclusions.

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/consumer-credit/enforcement-activity/CEA-MTR.pdf

:smile:

We have won. My job is done. Bye bye Turnbull.

Thanks Streetfighter.

It's revoke, not refuse a licence, ie. revoking current licences too.

This is truly wonderful.

Let's rename this thread 'HFO and Roxburghe licences revoked' - and get the champagne out!

It relates to the new application

Martin, it says revoke, not refuse. HFO Capital and Rox do not have applications in.

This is astonishing. And about time.

These were added on Roxy's licence last year too.

PCN Parking ServicesAdded http://www.paymypcn.netAdded

Martin, it says revoke, not refuse. HFO Capital and Rox do not have applications in.

 

This is astonishing. And about time.

Its not cut and dried tho yet.

I can't find licences or much activity for any of the other companies on that list. That is three big and nasty companies in deep poo... thanks to CAG.

There's a right of appeal, but this development will just encourage more evidence. I'll make sure of that...

Minded to refuse/revoke a licence

Where there are substantiated doubts about a trader's fitness, the OFT issues a 'Minded to Refuse' or 'Minded to Revoke' Notice (MTR). This is a formal notice advising the applicant or licensee that the OFT is minded to refuse to grant them a licence or is minded to revoke their existing licence and inviting them to make representations to an independent OFT adjudicator who will make a decision on the case (see below). The trader retains their licence until the adjudication process and any subsequent appeal is concluded.

Determination of minded to refuse/revoke a licence

Following the issue of an MTR, an independent OFT adjudicator considers representations from the applicant or licensee and then makes a decision whether to refuse or revoke. The Adjudicator gives regard to all information presented and where it is considered that the matters raised in the MTR are relevant to the applicant's or licensees fitness and the Adjudicator is not satisfied with their fitness to hold a licence, they will issue an adverse Determination to Revoke or Refuse (DTR). Alternatively, if the Adjudicator is satisfied with their fitness, a favourable determination can be issued. The trader has a right of appeal to the First Tier Tribunal if they disagree with a determination (see below). The trader retains their licence until the adjudication process and any subsequent appeal is concluded.

Appeal to First Tier Tribunal

Decisions by the OFT, such as determinations to revoke or refuse a licence, or to impose requirements on a trader in terms which the trader has not already agreed, can be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal. For licensing decisions, the trader retains their licence until any is concluded. In requirements cases, the requirements apply immediately.

This is the one we want to see

Determination to Revoke or Refuse

A prediction...

The rise of a company called Validor Capital. HFO have seen this coming.

Phoenix would be a better name, but that's been taken. But... how could HFO Capital sell choses that it possibly acquired illegally anyway, while trading without a licence?

What happens to previous court cases and current claims if licences are revoked?

Thanks Martin, saved me searching.

But this is still good... The system gives them time to restructure, sadly, but as mentioned, they have severe hurdles to overcome. Not that I hate them or anything, you understand...

The court cases could still proceed as long as the company still existed.

If they changed their name or were taken over,then they would still be liable me thinks-like for example Barclaycard with Goldfish.Citi with egg Virgin media with Telewest etc etc

Their CC licence event history does not give much-looks like this action has come either following an investigation,or by the levels of complaints theyve seen.

Indeed, the claims do not go away and must be defended - excellent and important point. But the majority of the portfolio - HFO Capital - was acquired without a valid CCL, so they have a bit of a problem. Think Mr A Turnbull might be at the Jobcentre soon. It was a rather basic error, as was fabricating the odd document.

Level of complaints - I reckon 80% via the power of CAG.

Turnbull is the only one listed on the HFO SERVICES LTD licence as running the org.

He is also listed on ROX.So if theres a determination made based on fitness then it would follow that all 3 would go.

EvtStageOpen DateNotes 6Minded To Refuse MTR20/05/2011This notice relates to the recent renewal application

http://www2.crw.gov.uk/pr/default.aspx

Yeah the questions in relation to their legality in the portfolio purchase is a good one.

They have manipulated the licences by chopping and changing officers,addresses and lead details...or more to the point have been see sawing them between the companies.

The lead for the HFOS licence reads

Business NameCompany Registration Number HFO Services Limited05120067

Yet if you look further down it says;

Current Individuals that run the organisation:

NamePosition Alasdair John Turnbull

But then we have this

Current Organisations that run the organisation:

NameCompany Registration NumberPosition Turnbull Rutherford Limited5717402

Also a director of HFO Capital Ireland. I have chapter and verse on these jokers. What a mess for one bloke. You might think it's incompetence, but I couldn't possibly comment. I think Badri Nathan might be a bit miffed. He only now lists Validor on his CV.

The listings are all to revoke; HFO Services' licence app has been pending since September 2009, so I suppose that will technically be a refusal! The other companies' licences are very much current. Tells you everything.

Certain Caggers have known for some while of the OFT's serious interest in their activities. I believe my CAG privileges remain restricted because I had to conduct some very sensitive court issues re HFO documents off-forum (to prevent comeback against CAG), but I now believe my actions have been proven as justified. I just hope the OFT see this through - it takes tons of crud to provoke them into action, so I'm delighted.

Take heed, DCA- and debt buyer-land. CAG has sharp teeth.

What privs remain restricted ?

Ok DB I just looked and saw it.

I have now enabled it-I think you may need it to heighten the awareness and continue whatever is needed.

Just please be good-and dont let me down.

Now time for sleep I think.

I have a Court appearance tomorrow supporting a fellow Cagger against another adversary CAPQUEST.

So g'nite.