Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you for that "read me", It's a lot to digest, lots of legal procedure. There was one thing that I was going to mention to you,  but in one of the conversations in that thread it was mentioned that there may be spies on the Forum,  this is something that I've read quite some time ago in a previous thread. What I had in mind was to wait for the thirty days after their reply to my CCA request and then send the unenforceable letter. I was hoping that an absence of signature could be the Silver Bullet but it seems that there are lot of layers to peel on this Onion.  
    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Cabot chasing 7 year old egg card debt?


Pete2015
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3123 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

first post but have been doing some reading

so hopefully we have a bit of an idea what we need to do

and hopefully this post is in the correct place,

if not, please feel free to move it!

 

Back in 2008 due to family health and work issues, we ran into severe financial difficulties.

 

 

We had several credit cards and came with to agreements with all but one to pay a full and final settlement.

This all took us several stressful months to sort.

We had defaults issued against us and began to manage our finances alot better.

 

 

The one credit card company eventually moved our debt to a DCA but at no point did we respond to their letters or frequent phone calls.

 

It now appears the old DCA has moved our debt on to a company called Cabot financial.

It looks to be a fairly standard letter asking for the payment or for us to contact them to sort our an arrangement.

 

Upon checking our credit files,

I see all of our defaults are now gone and there is no mention of the outstanding debt.

 

Do we simply contact the company using the following template?

 

 

  • Letter M - Dispute your liability for a debt where a creditor has not contacted you for over six years

If not, any advice as to what steps we need to take would be greatfully accepted.

 

Thank you in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pete and welcome to CAG...

 

I personally would send a CCA (section 77/78) request for the agreement...you will get far more peace than arguing its statute barred...as the DCA can still continue to try to collect.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

pers I'd not respond at all to a phishing letter.

 

 

who was the original creditor

and what type of debt was it?

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We did wonder about sending for the CCA but we were possibly under the wrong impression that the debt was statute barred. We don't mind the letters as long as we can be sure there is no action that can be taken.

 

The original creditor was Egg and it was a credit card.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if you don't mind the letters and as you say they know the right/current address

If they were stupid enough to issue a claim it being sb'd will kill it dead.

 

What date did you take the card .

There could well be PPI &/or penalties here for reclaim ing

 

Might be worth an sar to egg at Canadian sq address??

 

Dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We did wonder about sending for the CCA but we were possibly under the wrong impression that the debt was statute barred. We don't mind the letters as long as we can be sure there is no action that can be taken.

 

The original creditor was Egg and it was a credit card.

 

Requesting a copy of the agreement has no effect on the Statute of Limitations...but it does put Cabot on Notice that you know your onions and is a further hurdle for them to overcome before considering any litigation:wink:

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, had a quick look at what info we have.

 

 

It lookes like the card was orignally taken out in October of 2003 and a default notice was issued in March of 2008.

 

 

Pretty sure no PPI was taken out but we could be wrong!

Struggling to find all the original paperwork etc.

 

So do you think it would be wise us sending a SAR to Egg then?

 

If no payments have been made on the account and no written communication has been entered into,

is the debt actually statute barred or is it still actually owed?

 

 

We are a little confused as after reading a post on another forum someone was advised to pay even though the debt was gone from their credit file.

 

 

A comment was made that just because it seems to have gone,

the people are still within their rights to collect the money owed.

 

 

Sorry if this has been covered elsewhere,

 

 

just trying to find out what statue barred means to us in our case.

 

Thanks.

Pete2015

Link to post
Share on other sites

simple answer don't read other sites

prob a fleecing DCA posting that advice!!

 

 

a debt is statute barred if you have not

paid anything

written and signed any letters regarding the debt

or

used the card

in 6yrs

 

it always adviseable to add 1 or poss 2 months to that date to be sure.

 

whatever date the now owner of the debt

or any previous owner inc the original creditor placed a default marker makes no odds to the SB date

they are not linked

 

what more probably you might have read was:

that in England & wales

statute barring simply means any judgement attained in court cannot be enforced after 6yrs

so they don't bother with court.

 

in E&W a DCA can ask for payment

you can equally ask them to go away or ignore them.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...