Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

1 Follower

About Fluviomarine

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Dear Fellow Caggies, GREETINGS After plumbing the depths of my very own personal livelihood, I have resurfaced! I said I would continue posting, if I came across anything worth posting — and I have. For any of you who happen to know (or who are able to surmise at a glance) what's what, I would say skip down to WHERE THINGS STAND to get the latest scoop; otherwise, check out the RECAP. Apologies for the rather tedious and dry tirade (is that possible?). I didn't spend enough time to chop this down. Fluvio *** A RECAP After a strange beginning, Ca
  2. Dear fellow Caggies* Nothing to report since posts 39 and 29, I am afraid. Nothing material, that is. Cabot continues to call me, usually three times a day, leaving that familiar message on the third try: "Hello, can I speak with... Hello? HELLO? H-E-L-L-O?". This is in direct contravention of my explicit request not to contact me except in writing. Cabot & Co. continue to pretend not to know (else they are truly butt heads and really do not know) that they are leaving a message on an answering service. I've cleverly disguised mine, you see. It says, Hi. please leave a message af
  3. Thanks for the feedback, one and all (see my individual responses below). I will keep you posted, as I await news of Cabot, which could be a while, although I won't hold my breath. If, however, Cabot does "decide" to test my lungs, I am minded to continue to post, not quite regardless, but fairly mindful of the fact, in the form of a divertimento: a mock play on the subject of my waiting, a redaction of an already famous Becket play, but renamed "Waiting for Cabot" . . . (In which I would hope to capture the same chronicle of wasted time that Becket has in his work - but for a sligh
  4. Just an update for those of you who are interested: no news since my last action on this issue. But silence in these matters betokens anything but a reprieve, I'm sure. So, to recap: THE PROBLEM In a nutshell, the DCA (qua Cabot) claim I owe them money (sub £300) from a Barclay's account closed over 9 years ago, which Cabot "acquired" over 7 years after closure and, after "locating me" at my home address this year (where else would I be?), decided I should pay for. They decided to do this with a fanfare of letters (that have taken a strange chronology [see my post #25]) and with a ba
  5. I have now posted my next letter to the DCA (Cabot), and am following my plan of action as set out in my last post. (You can catch a refresh below, if you're a glutton for punishment.) But I would like to bring something else up here. In my correspondence with the DCA in question a disturbing pattern has emerged - trickery or tainting with due process? You decide. (Note the order of events...) 1. First letter: going on a fishing expedition? This DCA sends its first letter to me "out of the blue". It arrives at my home address, addressed to me, but the letter does not: * introd
  6. Indeed, gni03349. (And no, we won't.... ) Will pick up on this shortly. I will keep you all posted. Thanks again to one and all.
  7. Quite possibly, BeauBrummie. But my concern here is that the DCA (in this case it happens to be Cabot) has failed to provide evidence of payment or written contact from me in the relevant period under Section 5 of the Limitation Act after I invited them to do so. (A clear-cut case would be a clear-cut case, no? I suspect they have nothing - at least nothing legally tenable - on me.) Instead, the DCA wrote back to tell me that, no, I did acknoweldge the debt way back when with a payment - and that was that. I think this rather important for statute-barred claims: the burden of proof is a
  8. Thank you, sequenci. Good to know, I think. I wouldn't help Cabot by reminding them (like they don't know!). But, for my benefit, in this case would the creditor be the bank in question or the DCA taking up the debt on that bank's behalf? Or both?
  9. For the record (feel free to intercept/interject at any point)... * As I am taking a statue-barred approach (regardless of who owes the debt), I think the imperative here is — as babybear39 and 42man have said — that Cabot PROVE I made the payment they say I made. I will invite them to do so. (Just what form that proof will take and how I can establish if it is valid and legally tenable is beyond me — does anyone know?) I will add that if I have any reason to suspect that fraud is involved in any way I will inform the police. * I will then reiterate that I do not acknowledge the deb
  10. babybear39 and 42man, many thanks for your swift responses. (I'm feeling better already...)
  11. My first post, and not a very cogent one at that! (I realise I should have taken more time to write a shorter thread, but I've got a sense of urgency here.) Anyway, let me test the waters. I know there is a sea of already very useful, probably germane (if gloriously painstaking) information on the theme out here. So let me get to the meat on the hook of the matter, up front, and deposit some background info for - and I use the term advisedly, if not with some pride - any bottom feeders. With any luck, things will go swimmingly . . . Thanks in advance to those of you who take the time to
  • Create New...