There's nothing like multiple occurences of the same legal infringements to make a case for damages really potent!

I had some idiotic collection agency write to me to tell me they had checked the land registry and would seek to put a charge against my property. Odd thing is, I don't own it! Suspect they don't even bother checking but just bluff instead - and yes its definitely all about scaring people. The Recorded Delivery system in this country sadly doesn't work anymore. WHen I sent 5 CCA letters recorded delivery only 2 of them ever got Delivery Receipts. Upon phoning Royal Mail I was offered apologies and a form to put in for some ridiculously small amount of compensation (which I didn't bother filling out) and an explanantion that posties now often deliver without a receipt or just sign the receipt themselves (which my own posties have done several times when delivering to my own home), or of course it may have got lost - great! But if you have a copy of the letter, Courts usually accept that you sent it (I am told). If you then enclose a copy with the next couple of letters you send drawing the "creditor's" attention to their failure to respond it all adds to the weight of your evidence. Writing "Without Prejudice" doesn't mean someone can write whatever they like. If you feel threatened by a "without prejudice" letter you can still complain about it to the sender, the Law Society, the police (like they'd care) and maybe even the Court although I'd check on that with a friendly solicitor first. The "without prejudice" disclaimer enables parties to make offers, and negotiate without those offers being shown to the Court as an indication of guilt or acceptance of debt. Its not there to hide threats, lies, or abuse of process. Good luck with your fight! :O)

So the question(s) is(are) why did he feel forced to change trading name? AND do the law society know!?!?

Re post #202 Cabot's letter above: I wish I'd known it was that easy to get the idiots to put accounts on hold. Anyone ever tried their complaints procedure AFTER they have issued proceedings?

If memory serves Fredricksons International are the bunch that issue proceedings for around 10% of the amount which they claim they are owed (with the provision that they withhold the right to sue for the rest later) presumably because they realise that their case is so weak and the costs are much less to try for 10% and see what happens. Also more chance of a frightened Defendant buckling and paying what seems like an affordable amount. Yep they tried it on me - my defence was rock solid in that it had already been F&F settled, so they withdrew (ungracefully without letting me know). However a year again they had another punt on exactly the same basis. My defence the 2nd time was a little more blunt promising that they would withdraw again exactly as they had the first time. Which they did - again without any sort of notice or apology. I'm waiting for the next attempt - think a 3rd go would warrant me making a counterclaim for compensation for vexacious litigancy and harrassment.

WHat if they start proceedings before the CCA 1974 letter is sent and THEN default on it? Should a judge immediately issue an order to provide or better still an unless order to provide or has the defendant then missed the CCA 1974 letter "boat"? Not really expecting anyone to know the answer to that one but worth a try just in case :O) My experience so far is that the Court aren't in the least bothered.

Just looked at this from post #27... http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s...7/cabotapp.jpg Wondering how the argument about it not being signed by the OC and therefore not being a completed agreement is going? Yep I have the same and was hoping to use the same argument. Whoever microfiched it with the barcode over the SIGNED CCA 1974 wording must have been an absolute idiot! With it being illegible, unsigned by the OC, with no CCA 1974 advice and no terms and conditions could a judge find anyway to accept it as proof of an agreement? Someone must have tested this already?

djdave on 17th August you said ;"They did however send me what they claimed to be a Notice of Assignment which would have been sent from Barclaycard, the original creditor. This is clearly a forgery, not even a conjectured reconstruction, as Barclaycard do not have any record of sending such a document. This I believe is tantamount to fraud." I'm intrigued to know whether you or anyone else has got anywhere with this argument as I'm sure nigh on all of us have had one of those clearly fabricated letters. I myself complained to Cabot calling theirs fabricated when they sent me one as evidence under disclosure on the wrong company letterheading after a takeover of the OC by another bank, and and they issued me with a 2nd Witness statement sticking by their guns that it was a genuine representation of a letter which had been sent and it was just unfortunate that the company who's letterheading they had used hadn't rebranded the OC at the time the original letter would have been sent. They also claimed to be licensed by the OC to send out NoAs on their behalf. They have also done things like send out undated purported NoAs on "letterheadings" of OCs which have no address or company incoporation details or phone numbers on them - in fact nothing more than a logo! WHat ban would send out that!?!?! If one or two people get succes with having these pieces of fiction thrown out could we all use those as examples in Court of what these chancers routinely do? Any thoughts?

Sorry JonCris I don't quite understand. What is it up to the Litigant to produce evidence of being a requirement?

Is that true? If so I think a letter to the dailies would be in order!

Fascinating! Well done you! I wonder what shade of grey Hodson's and Cabot's chief exec's faces would go if we ALL issued proceedings against them on the same day. I love the idea of putting Hodsons out of business but they seem to think they can (and are) getting away with whatever they like. I keep pestering people here with questions but am wondering if the correct ettiquette is to start my own thread? I won't ask for names but what kind of people make up the Cabot Fan Club? Is it really worth running cases by you guys?

Brilliant replies - thanks Elizabeth1 & Seahorse. I'm comng to accept that much depends on the judge you happen to get. I was warned that one particular one near me can be a right ............ I'll leave you to guess who I got and how I found him! All I can say is that defaulting on CCA 1974 requests, CPR Part 18 requests, AND supplying illegible evidence didn't seem to bother him in the slightest. Fortunatley it was only a hearing for an application - fingers crossed he doesn't turn up on the BIG day! (Or that he takes those matters more seriously at that time)

Oh oh oh Seahorse hold on .... what's the difference between an application form and an agreement? (Please don't say whether or not it says "Application Form" or "Agreement" at the top). I have to run hom now (not literally) and check more thoroughly what they've sent me (its just possible that the title at the top of the form might actually be legible!) Anyone know if an agreement means diddly squat without its terms and conditions from the back? Yeah I know I'm full of questions all of a sudden - I'm feeling the sharp end of the pin at the moment!

Wow what a huge thread! These giuys are causing sooo much misery and angst. Just wondering if anyone has any answers to the following based on actual experiences through the Courts... 1) If a creditor defaults on a CCA request so committing an offence and continues to press (either by letter/phone or by legal action) for repayment of the alleged debt can he be successfully sued for damages? 2) Does defaulting on a CCA actually count for anything in the final reckoning at Court? Any success stories? 3) Does a "representation" of a notice of assignment which was clearly printed after the fact actually impress a Court enough to accept it as evidence that a real one was genuinely sent? 4) Is an illegible and very rough looking photocopy of what was probably a fax or microfiched agreement acceptable as evidence? Anyone managed to get one of those chucked out? 5) If a creditor persistently fails to supply copies of credit greements and/or notices of assignments, even flying in the face of multiple CCA requests and CPR Part 18 requests how long can they get away with it without the Court striking the cae out? 6) and fianally I promise (for now - wink) has ANYONE ever managed to get a copy of an actual DEED of assignment? By the way, and I'm sad to advise this, but I'm reliably told that even if a case has been struck out the Claimant can still apply for an application to have it reinstated within the following 30 days. The system sucks what can I say!?

I know this thred ended months ago now with a win (hurrah) but I just wondered if any of the people that had followed the CCA route and were hoping and waiting to see if Cabot's failure to fulfill it would assist their cases have any news on that yet. Does defaulting on a CCA put the dampers on a creditor's case? And does it make any difference if the CCA was sent after the Claimant had initiated proceedings rather than before? Any advice based on actual experience of this would be HUGELY appreciated :O)