Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx for your feedback. That is the reason I posted my opinion, because I am trying to learn more and this is one of the ways to learn, by posting my opinions and if I am incorrect then being advised of the reasons I am incorrect. I am not sure if you have educated me on the points in my post that would be incorrect. However, you are correct on one point, I shall refrain from posting on any other thread other than my own going forward and if you think my post here is unhelpful, misleading or in any other way inappropriate, then please do feel obliged to delete it but educate me on the reason why. To help my learning process, it would be helpful to know what I got wrong other than it goes against established advice considering the outcome of a recent court case on this topic that seemed to suggest it was dismissed due to an appeal not being made at the first stage. Thank-you.   EDIT:  Just to be clear, I am not intending to go against established advice by suggesting that appeals should ALWAYS be made, just my thoughts on the particular case of paying for parking and entering an incorrect VRN. Should this ever happen to me, I will make an appeal at the first stage to avoid any problems that may occur at a later stage. Although, any individual in a similar position should decide for themselves what they think is an appropriate course of action. Also, I continue to be grateful for any advice you give on my own particular case.  
    • you can have your humble opinion.... You are very new to all this private parking speculative invoice game you have very quickly taken it upon yourself to be all over this forum, now to the extent of moving away from your initial thread with your own issue that you knew little about handling to littering the forum and posting on numerous established and existing threads, where advice has already been given or a conclusion has already resulted, with your theories conclusions and observations which of course are very welcomed. BUT... in some instances, like this one...you dont quite match the advice that the forum and it's members have gathered over a very long consensual period given in a tried and trusted consistent mannered thoughtful approach. one could even call it forum hi-jacking and that is becoming somewhat worrying . dx
    • Yeah, sorry, that's what I meant .... I said DCBL because I was reading a few threads about them discontinuing claims and getting spanked in court! Meant  YOU  Highview !!!  🖕 The more I read this forum and the more I engage with it's incredible users, the more I learn and the more my knowledge expands. If my case gets to court, the Judge will dismiss it after I utter my first sentence, and you DCBL and Highview don't even know why .... OMG! .... So excited to get to court!
    • Yep, I read that and thought about trying to find out what the consideration and grace period is at Riverside but not sure I can. I know they say "You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is"  but I doubt they would disclose it to the public, maybe I should have asked in my CPR 31.14 letter? Yes, I think I can get rid of 5 minutes. I am also going to include a point about BPA CoP: 13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place. I think that is Deception .... They giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other! One other point to note, the more I read, the more I study, the more proficient I feel I am becoming in this area. Make no mistake DBCL if you are reading this, when I win in court, if I have the grounds to make any claims against you, such as breach of GDPR, I shall be doing so.
  • 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 returned Northern Rock loan CCA full copy


Cloak
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1934 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 I was wondering if anyone can offer some advice.

 

My partner took out a Northern Rock loan at the end of 2005 for £25,000, with agreed payment of around £37400 over 120 months.

 

As an aside it just shows how badly NR were engaged in unethical lending as she was only on £11k a year at the time.

 

She made 39 of those payments totalling just under £12200, and additionally she made around £470 in over payments to a grand total of £12670.

 

After being diagnosed with a long term illness, she lost her job and then found it difficult to repay the loan.

 

She organised token payments beginning April 2009, and paid an additional £50 before the debt was written off at just under £24700 at the end of November the same year.

 

She continued to make token payments until the end of July 2013 at which point she could no longer afford to do so, so she stopped.

 

The debt appears to have been sold on to Cabot in October of the same year (2013) for just under £1400 according to the full transaction statement they have returned, but there is no Notice Of Assignment documentation.

 

She started receiving letters from Cabot in June 2018, and she wrote asking for a copy of her CCA.

 

They have complied within the time limit with a full copy (doesn't appear to be reconstituted), including full transaction statements, and they are threatening CCJ action unless payment for the outstanding balance of the loan is made under agreed terms.

 

Like mentioned however, there was no Notice Of Assignment documentation to say how the debt was transferred to them.

 

My partner is very stressed by all this (especially due to the nature of her illness) as she has a very limited income from part time work (being unable to work full time), and I pay the rent and all bills so my money is stretched also.

 

By the way, no debts appear on her credit file, so we are worried that Cabot can also mess with that now.

 

Anyway, does anyone have advice on next steps to take?

 

My partner is looking into a (Debt Relief Order) DRO as a possible solution. Does anyone have experience with these?

 

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

WHen was the CCA requested, what exactly was contained in it?

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

Thanks for the responses guys.

 

Yes the debt was written off, then seems to have been bought at a later date

 

This is exactly what is written on the supplied statement of account.

 

2009-11-26 - WOAB - Bad Debt Write Off £24674.20

 

Then

 

2013-10-15 - ITRX - Sold Off debt bal adjust £1369.89

 

We don't actually know by whom that was sold off by, and how Cabot obtained the debt.

 

They are looking to make at leasy a £23,000 profit on a debt they bought for a marginal amount. Totally disgusting behaviour.

 

Also, the CCA request sent 14th December 2018 was the standard one from template as found at this site.

 

It states non acknowledgement of the debt, cites the relevant sections of the CC Act, and requests CA and statement of account.

 

As stated earlier, this was complied with within the 14 working day time frame it seems, as my partner received the response on the 2nd.

 

Thanks for your help so far.

 

Any next steps advice?

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cabot do not enforce legit debts. They only go after lemon debts. get doing your homework because cabot will get very greedy on this and may well try court.

 

You say they complied with the CCA request. Can you post up the response you got back please? because it must be an original copy and contain specific details for it to be compliant.

 

I think you need to make a SAR to the OC.

 

Strange cabot have left it for 5 years to try their luck. Thats another sign something isnt as it seems.

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

write -off is simply on the OC's book

quite a std entry

it cant comeback on your credit file

but theres nothing to stop Cabot trying it on if the paperwork is in order.

 

so you say you have had a CCA return?

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

The black boxes I have used to cover personal details but these details are indeed on the form including what she is sure is the correct signature.

 

The gap may be explained because we had moved without updating address with any DCA in view of the fact her condition remained the same without affordability to maintain even token payments.

 

Unfortunately, address details were updated on her credit file after giving her bank our new address after an account freeze because of returned mail.

Edited by dx100uk
upload removed
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that EVERYTHING they sent as part of their CCA response? If so, its not compliant. Better luck next time crapbot

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

one multipage PDF please so we can rotate and zoom

read upload

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

Then youre in luck. That is definitley not compliant whatsoever. Theyre missing a lot of stuff seeing as its a 2005 agreement. Hell, this wouldnt have even satisfied a reconstituted one.

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

where are the records of the payments till 2013 you mention above?

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

looks ok to me what missing imp?

sorry I didn't see the last sheet.

 

cabot didn't pay £1369.89 for the debt..thats an adjustment by Nram

 

however if that's an adjustment ...then so is the 24674.20 write off.!!

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 again.

 

@renegadeimp mentioned making a Subject Access Request to the OC...Is that Original Claimant of the debt?....NRAM?

 

What should we be looking for in the SAR to disprove the validity of Cabot's claim to the debt?

 

@dx100uk you mentioned the adjustments made on the account by NRAM, including the write off.

 

Can you advise what bearing this has on this case...Written off debt can't be collected on?

 

It would be great to know how others have dealt with this type of situation.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

looks ok to me what missing imp?

sorry I didn't see the last sheet.

 

cabot didn't pay £1369.89 for the debt..thats an adjustment by Nram

 

however if that's an adjustment ...then so is the 24674.20 write off.!!

 

Pre 2007 they need the original. Most of it is there, not all of it. Such as the full application, full terms and any changes after until termination of the account etc. Again, MOST of its there, not all. Cabot are hoping the OP doesnt notice that, and resides to paying the 20k+

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

if they write off one bit, and cabot accept it doesn't exist

then the other write off must be valid too..no debt

sar goes to the Original creditor

 

yes imp, this would have been signed at the same time as the 100% mortgage....

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

Yes. But they still need to supply it to fulfil the request :) But my money is mainly on something behind the scenes. Nobody is gonna sell a debt like that without going for the throat themselves first.

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

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...