Definitely wouldn't send them and income and expenditure form, as they have no right to ask for it.

As you've already asked for a copy of your CCA then you could send the 'Bemused' letter to Mortimers which basically says you're surprised to recieve their letter as the aleged account is in dispute due to thier failure to comply with a CCa request made in 2008.

HFC are the creditor behind numerous credit cards eg - Marbles and store agreements eg PC World.

Send letter 18 as advised and see what they come back with.

Ist Credit have a habit of sending out a new system generated threatening letter each week to try and bully people into paying accounts, so don't be fazed if you receive them. They're just empty threats.

Once you get a response to your letter post it up and others will advise you on what steps to take next.

.I just wondered if First Credit were one of the usual DCA's for Marbles to use?? I was kind of expecting Restons to take over - given the replies on here.

Am I right in thinking I just sit tight and wait for the letters to start from First Credit?

Yes , my alleged Marbles account was sold to 1st Credit nearly 2 years ago. .

As HFC will never find the correct paperwork, you shouldn't have any problems in getting 1stCred to crawl back under thier stone again.

My thoughts exactly Shadow. This to me is just the usual Cabot smoke and mirrors, but I'm not buying it.

Informed Cabot that as a Default Notce had not been issued prior to their purchase of this account, it had been unlawfully rescinded.

Cabot have now replied confirmng that no default had been issued prior to their purchase. However they infer it was not needed as the original terms say 'We may tranfer this agreement or any of our rights or responsibilities under it to any company firm or person at any time'

What they omit is that as a regulated agreement it has to be done within the regulations of the CCA 1974, which as far as I read states a default should have been issued prior to sale.

Their letter carries on to say that they have the responsibility of the original creditor to administer the account in the same manner as the original lender, so with no payment being made they issued their own default notice and termination.

Before I respond, does anyone have comments?.

Update:

Cabot have at no time sent me a Default Notice, although the OC did. I know a Default notice is essential, but is it a defence that Cabot didn't send one, if the OC did so?

As far as I am aware, your account should only have been defaulted by the original creditor prior to sale of account to Cabot. Cabot would not issue a second default notice, and could be in trouble if they did.

Have you checked that the DN issued by BOS is legally correct ie dates and format?

After reading around the site, could this mean that the agreement was recinded ie the account no longer exists, and that all Cabot/OC could ask for would be the arrears that existed prior to the termination.

TY

Yes. There seem to be a lot of accounts that Goldfish sold to Cabot without prior issue of a Default Notice.

Read some of Pinky69's threads on Cabot and invalid/lack of default issues which contain a goldmine of information on this and recission of contract. .

The Loan deal is already in the court and I have only just got a copy agreement sent, (never got one before) from their sols and then only by the expedient of denying knowledge of the loan. Steve.

Have you received actual court papers to respond to or is this still a letter threatening court action?

 

One question though? I cant believe that DLC will be prepared to sit back and just send me a letter every 21 days? They will want to have a go wont they, and theyre bound to send me a dodgy copy of my agreement?

 

My OH has been receiving the 'account on hold' letter every 3 weeks for 15 months now from Hillesden during which time no payments have been made.

You can phone the FOS and explain to their advisors that HFC are giving you the run around on how they have calculated your outstanding amount, and are ignoring your complaint made in Sept and refusing to supply the inormation you need. If they think your complaint is valid they'll send you a form with the details you've given over the phone prefilled for you to sign and return with copies of the letters you've sent HFC.

When the FOS then make contact HFC, I think HFC will respond with an explantion of how they've calulated this pretty sharply, as it will cost them more than double what you owe if the FOS get involved on your behalf.

My OH jas had a similiar situation with a Morgan Stanley account, see my post' Morgan Stanley- Cabot question' don't know how to provide link.in which Pinky69 has similiarly explained fact Morgan Stanley didn't issue default notice prior to sale to Cabot makes this rescission of contract.

Checked this with the legal helpline on my insurance and they have confirmed what the posters on here are advsing. ie if original creditor didn't issue a default then there is no debt for Cabot to chase.

It is down to Cabot to prove that the original creditor issued a valid default notice. Neither can they claim they aren't enforcing just collecting arrears. And in your case if Cabot were slippery enough to try to persuade a judge that they had the right to issue a Notice under Section 87 then they've mucked that up as well.

Course as we are all only too aware, it all depends on the Judge on the day, there are no guarantees for success in court cases.

Cal37

you've left an old account number on the agreement you posted.

Thanks so very much for your help. Will go and read further on the case you mentioned. Cabot are so slippery to deal with, but your excellent explanation solves a worrying issue for us..

And similiar to your thread Goldfish redirected a number of payments made by OH to them through a DMP with CCCS (before we stopped the CCCS plan) to Cabot . OH had no knowledge of this at the time.

Thanks again , your help is very much appreciated by us and I'm sure by all the other people on the forum trying to deal with Cabot.

Sending you good luck on your appeal as it seems you have had a rough deal with this jusdgement.

My simple understanding is you were defending on the unenforceability of a CCA using s61 s65 and 127) and lost due to the judges's misinterpretaion of the McGuffick case which clearly states it has no relevance where 61 65 and 127 is in question. That would have been the main thrust of your defence if the judge had'nt struck out the case in favour of Cabot, with the NOA and Default Notice coming along later as addtional points of your argument.

Therefore I'm confused to why the NOA is your main point in the appeal. If you win your appeal then your case will be heard in detail and you would get the chance to raise the NOA and Default Notice as additional ammo then.

And is Cabot's claim that they are not enforcing merely claiming arrears not also irrelevant? If the CCA is ruled unenforceable due to non compliance with s61 s65 and s127, then it doesn't matter if Cabot are claiming partial arrears or the full amount, as being an agreeement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act, Cabot have no other avenue to try and claim this money.

If I'm talking a load of nonsense my apologies in advance, Will probably be fighting my own battle with Cabot in the future and just trying to understand the reasoning.

They cannot issue another DN - there is no account to issue one on - it was rescinded at the point of sale. That puts you back in the position you were in before there was any agreement. MSDW rescinded it by selling it without issuing a DN.

Hello again Pinky69. Can you explain or point me in the direction of an explanation of why any alleged agreement was rescinded at point of sale when Morgan Stanley sold to Cabot without issuing a Default Notice.

Cabot have started calling here again 2 or 3 times a day. It will only be a matter of time before they run out of phone numbers to call from and escalate this, and would like to to understand better what this means before OH is forced to write them another letter.

Thanks VW

I'm no expert, so sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but you should have received a Default Notice from Morgan Stanley, before this account was sold to Cabot. There's no mention of this document in the amended POC's, so you should ask for it.

Also the Assignment you want to see is a copy of the original not some cooked up it' would have looked like this blue peter job' representation letter from Cabot.

If you have no equity in the house and no other money I cannot see what Worst Credit hope to gain by making you bankrupt other than seeking to punish you.

If 1sCredit know you have lived in your house for 23 years they will be under the impression (wrongly in your case from what you've said) that there must be a lot of equity in it for them to get their grubby hands on. They forget that people may have remortgaged up to the hilt over the years and there is no equity left.

How are you getting on with your preparations for this meeting?

.

MBNA must be the worst for setting minimum monthly repayments which keep you paying these cards off for a lifetime.

Many years ago had a card where the minimum repayment asked for each month was £200 , but the interest applied was £185. If that was what I paid each month, then I only reduced the total balance by £185 per year but MBNA kept £2220 to themselves per year for interest.

No wonder people run out of money and can't ever repay these credit cards:mad:.

So I hope they have to set higher repayment figures too.

Forgot to say that this letter should be sent from Hariboh as his/her Final Response to TSB's response (if that makes sense)

When a DCA responds like this to a previous 'in dispute leter' from me I always respond once outlining again my reasons in general why I disagree with their comments. Then state this is my Final Response until they supply me with a compliant CCA copy. After sending this I usually ignore any future generic threatograms correspondence..

Thus I can provide an audit trail in any future court proceedings showing I haven't ignored their detailed correspondence, but have tried my best to end the dispute.

No default will be issued in the case of an overdraft

We received a default from First Direct for a small unpaid overdraft before it was sold to a DCA

With all of our RBS accounts they issued a Default pretty quickly before passing to their internal recoveries department.

But surely if RBS closed and sold the account then no more charges and interest can be added. Or is this a new RBS ploy?

I would also phone the Finacial Ombudsman about this, as this seems like unfair business practice. With only incap benefit and charges and interest being added you have no chance of ever repaying this. The FOS advisor will tell you on the phone whether they can intervene in your case or not. RBS usually respond very quickly to the prospect of the FOS investigating.

The CCA copy they have sent you and their explanation for why it is acceptable is a load of bull****. This is a typical response from a creditor who no longer has the original agreement or can't be bothered spending the time looking for it. While they can omit the signature they can't omit the prescribed financial terms , and stating on the form that the precribed terms are 'as stated in your original agreeement' is nonsense.

You can write back and tell them they have not sent you a compliant copy of your CCA as the prescribed financial terms are missing, the original terms and conditions have also not been sent ( as in Section 78(1) provided by Mystery- and of any document referred to in it.

If they eventually send you a microfiche copy, they could also be stuffed as they are usually illegible and quite often it means they don't have the original to produce in any court proceedings.

You may also like to add that you believe that they are trying to mislead you contrary to the CPUTR regulations 2008 in stating this is a true copy of your CCA, when it clearly isn't and you are reporting them to TS and OFT.

The OFT have issued guidelines on what has to be sent to meet rgulations and this definitley doesn't fit them. Sorry I can't provide a link to the document but Ida is usually excellent at having these links to hand:).

Trust Deeds aren't suitable for many people and I would avoid them like the plague. the only person who mainly benefits is the insolvency company who manage it. You will have to release up some of the equity in your house.

As your credit record is probably defaulted it means if you can afford the extra mortgage payment to release the equity you'll pay a higher interest rate on it. To me it's like throwing more money away on something you can sort yourself.

It's possible to set up DMP's for free with either CCCS or Payplan, but you'd probably need about £100 per month to divide up amongst your creditors for them to take you on. Gives you some initial breathing space.

Even if CCCS/Payplan can't take you on they'll send you their free advice pack with template letters to send to all your creditors with offers of token paymenets.

You haven't said what your debts are ie credit cards, loans and whetehr they are secured or not. For your unsecured debts have you checked they are enforceable by sending CCA requests?

Don't despair we had debts higher than that 6 years ago. We're still here , haven't been taken to court - yet, still live in our house, make really small token payments to some creditors, and have now found we have about 6 unenforceable account which are all in dispute and we don't pay anything to at the moment:-).

Don't worry you'll get all the help you need from this site

This is normal Cabot rubbish, saying they only need need to provide it if one still exists. The actual law says they don't have to provide it, only if one NEVER existed. Big difference, and typical of Cabot cherrypicking and twisitn parts of consumer law.

Cabot are getting desperate these days, maybe their 6 million losses for last year. You could also send Cabot a Final Response and say that until they provide you with a compliant CCA you will not enter into further

dialogue on this matter.

You should report them to TS and OFT as well for asking for payment while in default of sending any document, as they'll accept your complaint in this situation. Only a large numbers of complaints will ever get this mob shut down.

This is one seriously strange case.

 

If this agreement is not yours, then someone has been very naughty indeed.

 

The most interesting part is "your" signature. You say it is similar to yours? Did anyone at Crapbot ever have any access to a signature? Did you ever sign any letters?SH

In post 3 DEBANT says that Cabot asked her to write and sign her letter so they could make a comparison with any contract:eek:

The alleged account was unlawfully rescinded by Morgan Stanley Dean Witter at the point of sale to Cabot because it was terminated by them at the point of sale without prior issue of a Default Notice in breach of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 S 87 (1). The alleged account therefore no longer existed at the time of purchase by Cabotr.

Thanks Pinky, this is the same as the lawyer said when asked about the validity of this Default Notice.So I take it that this Cabot Default Notice is invalid and irrelevant.

The microfiche copy of the application form copy they sent OH is also only 4 x4 inches in size, incredible as that may seem, therefore totally illegible and I believe from other posts Morgan Stanley destroyed the original paperwork..

Will keep hold of your excellent letter later for when Cabot eventually start threatening again or issue court papers.

thanks

v. weary