Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is a ridiculous situation.  The lender has made so many stupid errors of judgement.  I refuse to bow down and willingly 'pay' for their mistakes.  I really want to put this behind me and move on.  I can't yet. 
    • Peter McCormack says he has secured a 15-year lease on the club's Bedford ground.View the full article
    • ae - i have no funds to appoint lawyers.   My point about most caggers getting lost is simply due to so many layers of legal issues that is bound to confuse.  
    • Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same.   Yes.  But every interested buyer was offering within a range - based on local market sales evidence.  Shelter site says a lender is not allowed to wait for the market to improve. Why serve a dilapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease.   The dilapidations notice was a legal first step.  Freeholders have to give time to leaseholders to remedy.  Lender lawyers advised the property was going to be sold and the new buyer would undertake the work.  Their missive came shortly before contracts were given to buyer.  The buyer lawyer and freehold lawyers were then in contact.  The issue of dilapidations remedy was discussed..  But then lender reneged.  There was a few months where neither I nor freeholders were sure what was going on.  Then suddenly demolition works started.   Before one issues a s146 one has to issue a LBA.  That is eventually what happened. ...legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease   A s146 was served.  It took 3y but the parties came to a settlement.   (They couldn't revert as they had ripped out irreplaceable historical features). The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there.  That's not the case   One can ask for another extension.  In this instance the freeholders eventually agreed with a proviso for the receiver not to serve another. You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension.  Correct.  But receiver lawyer was an idiot.   He made so many errors.  No idea why the receiver instructed him?  He used to work for lender lawyers. I belatedly discovered he was sacked for dishonesty and fined a huge sum by the sra  (though kept his licence).  He eventually joined another firm and the receiver bizarrely chose him to handle the extension.  Again he messed up - which is why the matter still hasn't been properly concluded.   In reality, its quite clear the lender/ receiver were just trying to overwhelm me (as trustee and leaseholder) with work (and costs) due to so many legal  issues.  Also they tried to twist things (as lawyers sometimes do).  They tried to create a situation where the freeholders would get a wasted costs order - the intent was to bankrupt the freeholders so they could grab the fh that way.   That didn't happen.  They are still trying though.  They owe the freeholders legal costs (s60) and are refusing to pay.  They are trying to get the freeholders to refer the matter to the tribunal - simply to incur more costs (the freeholders don't want and cant's afford to incur)  Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to.... The property does not qualify under 67 Act.  Their notice was invalid and voided. B petition was struck out. So this is dealt with then.  That action was dealt with yes.   But they then issued a new claim out of a different random court - which I'm still dealing with alone.  This is where I have issues with my old lawyer. He failed to read important legal docs  (which I kept emailing and asking if he was dealing with) and  also didn't deal with something crucial I pointed out.  This lawyer had the lender in a corner and he did not act. Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been ....  Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at?   I could.  But the evidence is clear cut.  Receiver email to lender and lender lawyer: "our strategy for many months  has been for ceo to get the property".  A lender is not allowed to influence the receivership.   They clearly were.  And the law firm were complicit.  The same firm representing the lender and the ceo in his personal capacity - conflict of interest?   I  also have evidence of the lender trying to pay a buyer to walk.  I was never supposed to know about this.  But I was given copies of messages from the receiver "I need to see you face to face, these things are best not put in writing".  No need to divulge all here.  But in hindsight it's clear the lender/ receiver tried - via 2 meetings - to get rid of this buyer (pay large £s) to clear the path for the ceo.   One thing I need to clarify - if a receiver tells a lender to do - or not to do - something should the lender comply? 
    • Why ask for advice if you think it's too complex for the forum members to understand? You'd be better engaging a lawyer. Make sure he has understood all the implications. Stick with his advice. If it doesn't conform to your preconceived opinion then pause and consider whether maybe he's right.
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
      • 161 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
  • Recommended Topics

Cabot and RBS Credit card Debt - Statute barred?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2065 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

In Aug 2010, The Royal Bank of Scotland terminated my current account and associated borrowing.

 

At the time, I had 2 current accounts and one credit card. The debt on the accounts is £0 and £834 respectively.

 

It was initially chased (although not sure why they were chasing a balance of nil) and I never made any payments, wrote to them, answered their calls etc.

Both these accounts show on my Credit File as defaults.

 

However the date doesn't show 2010 as it should but 2013 and 2014 presumably when they last updated them.

 

The credit card balance was £7k+ and was again chased by RBS but again, no payments were made, calls answered or letters written.

 

This debt never appeared on my credit file despite passing through the hands of numerous low level debt collection companies until last year when it was picked up by CABOT. They are calling and writing on a regular basis but again, neither are acknowledged.

 

No court action has been taken on any of the three accounts.

 

My questions are therefore -

Are the debts now statute barred (5 years in Scotland)

 

Why do the dates not reflect the dates of my last correspondence with them?

 

Should I write to RBS and CABOT stating they are statute barred and asking them to be removed?

 

Thank you.

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

All depends when the creditor actually defaulted the agreements and notified the CRAs...which is not always necessarily 3 months after the breach as per the ICO guidelines.

 

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

If cabot has it then its 99.99% unenforceable. Time to do your homework and find out why. Proof of this is its already been passed around multiple DCA's already. And for 7k, the OC would have taken you to court themselves.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Were the debts taken out whilst resident in Scotland?

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

Thanks.

 

Debts were taken out while resident in Scotland.

 

The current account defaults are both duplicated in my Experian Report.

 

The accounts were terminated in Aug 2010 and both show a default date of 28/2/2011.

 

However, there is another default date shown on the report of 31/3/2013 shown on the one with a zero balance.

Should both of these come off in Feb next year?

 

As for the credit card, I was unable to continue paying this in 2010 but the default wasn't registered with the CRA until 18/4/2013.

 

What should I do next with these?

I want them off my Report asap.

 

Thanks again.

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

So all are now totally extinguished under Scottish SB rules so do not exist.

 

As for the credit file

They will remain there for 6 yes from defaulted date

 

If the defaulted dates are wrong

Then you need proof of 3rd missed payment or copy of org default notice

And write to whomever is the owner of the default

And demand it is corrected within 1£4 days

Else a complaint will be raised with the ICO

And compensation sought

 

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

Debts are SB but the banks especially are deliberately not issuing default notices to stretch out the time before the debt becomes SB.

This means that with a bit of creative reporting they can get 11 years before it shows as being SB if you allow them to play that game.

 

 

They will claim that they spent 5 years discussing the matter with you in an attempt to resolve your financial problems or they may claim that they had lost contact with you and were not reporting a default until they were certain of your new address

(even if you hadnt moved, they would then claim they needed to ascertain your identity properly).

 

Abuse of process

so inform the CRA you dispute the entry and then use the guidelines for debt collecting activity to go after the bank and Cabot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Except that sb on normal debts start from last date of payment

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

UPDATE

 

I never got around to chasing this up

a recent check has shown that the duplicate bank defaults have dropped off a few months ago.

 

I'm now left with two defaults,

the original lender, RBS and Cabot.

 

Both are for the same credit card.

I'm now going to pursue this.

 

Are there template letters to use (Scotland) to send to both the original lender for all the relevant details and to Cabot to eventually get the defaults removed?

 

Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If its the same account number/agreement .....its irrelevant..you can only be defaulted once.

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

no need to write anything

the two defaults for the same debt are not double harming you.

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

But I'm disputing the dates. They say 2013, I say 2010. If 2010 I should get them removed but I need information from the original lender (RBS) and/or Cabot. Will any letter do or is there a specific template so I don't reset the clock so to speak.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you sar the OC

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

But I'm disputing the dates. They say 2013, I say 2010. If 2010 I should get them removed but I need information from the original lender (RBS) and/or Cabot. Will any letter do or is there a specific template so I don't reset the clock so to speak.

 

Ah...that wasn't in your initial post # 9.So you need the date corrected only.

 

Following thread explains in detail how to amend data with creditor and CRAs.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?479229-Arrow-put-debt-back-on-Experian-with-bogus-default-date-OCs-DN-was-2006!!/page2

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

Will payment of token amount extend the duration when statute barred will occur?

 

Yes

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 get thanks.

Last question.

In order to make sure I have the correct information before asking for a Notice of Correction,

 

can I request relevant details from the original lender (RBS) without jeopardising my position?

 

I guess I should ask for a copy of the default letter and when the last payment was made?

 

Should I ask for any information that has given them the idea that the day was 2013 such as a fictitious payment or perhaps phone contact?

Link to post
Share on other sites

phone contact cannot reset SB date

 

 

as post 14 then

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

wont be whan last payment was made,

it will the the date the debt was last acknowledged so ( for example)

if you wrote to them 2 years ago saying that you cant afford to pay them

that would be read as acknowledging the debt is yours

and that contact would be the date used for starting the SB clock.

 

 

Also that theoretical letter wouldnt change the defaut date

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

Hi guys, this must be th elongest running thread on here. Anyway, I have an update following on from a SAR made earlier this year.

 

The original Credit Card issuer was RBS.

Payments were made up until April 2013.

 

Since then, no payments have been made and there was no written or telephone contact with RBS.

The amount owed has been fixed after that time and never increased.

 

Furthermore, it doesn't appear that a Default Letter was ever issued by them as there is no copy in the SAR documentation.

 

The Debt was "sold" to Cabot in 2016 and I have never communicated with them in any form yet they still keep sending me letters periodically.

 

My credit file has Defaults on it from both RBS and Cabot.

 

Am I right in thinking that the debt is now statute barred?

If so, do I write to RBS and Cabot pointing this out and asking them to remove the Defaults?

Is there a template?

 

Thank you in advance. I'm nearly there with this. :-)

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

statute barring and defaulted date are not the same

and NO just because you have now proved the debt IS extinguished that doesn't mean the default can be removed

two totally differing things.

 

as for no DN copy in the SAR

they don't have to provide that

all they have to do is show one WAS sent

that info will be in the account log/comms log of the SAR.

 

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

thread title updated

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

already explained in the link by andy in post 15

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...