If theyb turn up at your home (very doubtful) you don't have to answer the door or speak to them. If you do just ask them to leave and nothing more. Do not enter into a conversation with them. If they won't leave tell them they are trespacing and call the police. Who were they?

I would tend to carry on paying at the lowe rate and wait to see what they do.It does sound to me like the usual devious route to establish a contact with you by telephone. I feel it always best to avoid telephone conversations as they are trained operatives who will always try to push you into an agreement that you cannot afford. You could write back and suggest that you will only deal with them by letter and NEVER discuss your fimnancial affairs by telehphone.Send it Recorded Delivery of whatever it is called these days and keep the receipt. That way they cannot deny you have written to them.

Post any response that you get on here.

My time is running out to send my WS and I need to get it into the post by Wednesday latest.

Is there anyone out there that can help with my last post please?

I'd feel harassment could enter the equation because in 18 months, on one account alone Cabot called me 338 times ... almost daily, sometimes several times a day and by their own admission, according to their computer log, they have also spoken to third parties. Calling this number of times must constitute a breach of the Consumer Credit Act and the Harassment laws but I am currently looking into this at the moment.

I have just realised they have rolled two of your accounts into one as they have done with me. It seems they can do this but i think it makes it more difficult to defend. This puts your case into the Fast Track court does it not which as I am led to believe is more csortly if you lose. Can anyone verify this please?

Thanks cymruambyth

I'll certainly look into this.

Meanwhile I have a few questions regarding documentation attached to Morgans witness statement that I have now received if anyone is able to respond please?

1) Are they allowed under court procedure to attach documents to their witness statement that were not included in the 'exchange of documents' bundle?

2) Are the credit card 'conditions' required to carry a date of issue? I would haver thought so as they could have been contrived at any time.

3) If the credit card conditions do not provide a clause that states they have the right to sell a debt on ... does the law allow them to do this? Again, I would think not!

4) Similarly, Morgans claim that when a debt is assigned they are permitted under the agreement (they do not state whether this is theirs with the particular credit card or my original agrrement with the credit card issuer) to continue adding interest from the date they take on the debt until court procedings are issued which, in my case is 12%. (but they don't state whether this is per month, per year or what!)

Once more, this seems highly dubious and is I feel a point to challenge them on.

5) One of the two credit cards involved with this case have missold me PPI that has not been returned as well as adding excessive (£20) penalty and late charges to the balance. I had written to the credit card company about this but they failed to respond.

As I only have a few days to prepare my witness statement I would appreciate any urgent help anyone can provide. Thanks.

Yes, there is that to it but I wonder whether they would go through all the due process just to be vindictive?

The thing is, if they are to bankrupt you, they still haver to pay fees which off the top of my head, so don't quote me on this is £500, why bother to pay this and take you through the process if you have no assets?

Judging by the way Morgans prepare their cases, there surely must be some way of bringing this to the niotice of the authorities, maybe the Law Society? I am having similar problems with them because of a scant POC and a refusal to comply with CPR requests. Numerous members of CAG seem to be having the same or similar problems.They are taking me to court for 2 credit card accounts luumped together on a single claim.

Re your question about a charging order. I have no experience here but if your name is no longer on the deeds I cannot see how this could be enforced, Surely they can only charge something that is in your name? I am sure other cagers will be able to assist more with this one.

Thanks 42man, I have already done this (twice0 and they claim they have sent me the items requested but strange as it seems ... I have not received them. I have complained to the court but they have ignored my letter and indeed they have also ignored the fact that I have complained about Morgans not complying with CPR procedures. I guess the next route will be to try and get a court application forcing them to comply?

My case can be followed at:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?284954-Cabot-Morgans-Claim-form-received

Hi Simon

As my case seems to be similar I have sent you a message through the normal message line.

Have you got any further with this since your last post?

Cheers

Sorry Bootmaker ... I may be naive but what is a CPUTR request?

It appears nobody has contributed to this thread ... or am I looking in the wrong place?

I have posted a new thread titled 'Cabot Witness Statements' as recommended.

Hi fellow caggers ... I am starting this new thread to encourage everyone who is concerned about the methods used by Cabot/Morgans in dealing with any claims being made against them. From my own experience and those already posted on this site, it appears that Cabots are blatantly disregarding court rules and correct procedure with vague claimns and POCs that are extremely vague and are not supported by evidence. They are attempting to bully inexperienced defendants into submission using fear and by refusing to provide supporting evidenceunder and disclosures under CPR requests. What concerns me the most is that the courts appear to be disregarding these antics by allowing the cases to proceed to court on flimsy evidence. In most of these cases the courtds award judgement to the Claimant.

As I understood it, the County Court system was meant to simplify processes so that the layperson who cannot afford legal representation, can feel comfortable conducting their own defence. However, in practice this is far from the case and many defendant's are being given short shrift by hostile judges who, in many cases are ruling against the defendant simply because they are are the 'Defendant' and without the Claimant proving their case. In such cases it seems that Morgans are relying a standard form of attack that is not supported by any appropriate documentation. In other cases they are combining more than one acount into a single claim that is difficult to defend and may not even be legal. Many members are reporting a marked lack of patience by judges who, at times are refusing to even read the Defendant's witness statements and unfairly take the side of Morgans in cases that do not follow correct procedures.

By exhanging information hopefully we may be able make some positive headway in defending these spurious actions and by putting pressure on the courts to throw out spurious claims. If you have had or are having any dealings with these companies please support this thread by posting your experiences ... but beware as it is highly likely what we say is being monitored.

Thanks again. This is most useful. It certainly seems a point I can use as part of my defence.

Consumeredge ... this sounds a good idea. Sorry if this is a bit naive but how do I begin a new thread?

Toymaker1 ... I think the POC has already been posted early in this thread but if not I'll post it again, but essentially it just states I owe £xxxx on two different accounts and as usual they have failed to offer any evidence. It might as well be the Man on the Moon saying I owe them the amounts claimed. I have not had a witness statement from them, just the bundle of papers referred to previously that really could apply to anyone as there is nothing specific apart from naming me on the computer data for calls etc. I believe I have to file my bundle of papers by the end of the week but I'll check this as it is getting quite confusing.

I am also trying to find some legislation that may make it illegal to lump to unrelated accounts together as one case. Does anyone know of any?

I am wondering at loud here. I think I should request SAR from Morgans/Cabot as I have no idea what they hold on me or how they arrive at their POC without them providing any evidence to this end. It is also conceivable that I if they can prove ownership of any accounts relating to me I may well have also been wrongly sold PPI on one or both of these accounts. Any opinions please?

Hi Molly I have found this thread and will read through it when I have the opportunity but I am possibly having similar issues with this crowd over the dodgy way that they prepare their POC and deal with the courts. I am trying to get a group of us together to pool information to see if there is any way that we can prompt the courts to deal with these people.

Is there anyone else out there who we know is facing one of these claims who could make contact?

Does anyone also have any advice on dealing with this?

We must remember that many County Court judges are solicitors who have been promoted through the system and we are very much at their mercy and because they are expected to deal with a wide range of cases and complicated rules they often rule by the seat of their pants rather than on what is legally correct. This is terrible and should not be the case.I did win a case some years ago when the Claimant was unable to produce the CCA. The judge initially adjourned the case to give them time to find it but on advice I wrote to the court and said that I felt the judge had made an error and quoted the relevant part of the Consumer Credir Act regarding CCAs and got the case dismissed. One small victory.

I wonder whether a complaint to the Chief Lord Justice at the Dept of Justice might get some headway but I doubt it. I have written to them before when Jack Straw was in charge as Minister and didn't even get a reply despite sending several letters. I saw my MP about it to but he wasn't really interested apart from saying an all party committee were invetigating DCAs or so I thought.

Your idea sounds good consumeredge. Do you have any contact details or links to others? The first step might be to put in a formal complaint to each of the courts involved in these cases as a joint entity and see if it gets anywhere. OFT might also be an a route to follow. What do you think?

How then can this be challenged then do you think toymaker1?

Your opinions on the following will be appreciated folks. I have tried to keep this as short & concise as I can.

I have now had the opportunity to study at the large bundle sent to me by Morgans relating to one of my accounts and much relating to the second account follows the same pattern I have outlined below. This contains over 300 entries of computer data on one account alone which is mainly dribble that relates to hundreds of telephone calls made to me, the majority appear to be automated or not answered. This proves what a nuisance they have made of themselves - surely is this not construed as harassment?

It seems that Morgans are doing nothing more than attempting to bamboozle me and the Court with paperwork that has no substance and seems to me to offer no evidence. Interesting ... they record a conversation (though purported to be to a woman) during May 2010 who told them I would only deal with Cabot (or whoever?) by letter. I had previously written to them at length to say that I did not wish to be called by phone and that I would refuse to speak to them although I would respond to personal letters. This instruction was totally ignored and they continued making calls, sometimes several a day. As it seems a large proportion of these were 'silent calls' I responded by changing my telephone number to I presume they were calling the answer service I used for my former business.

There is a note on the data to say that the balance was assigned to Cabot (presumably?) in October 2009. Various correspondence has been noted on their computer data which is interesting.

They record receiving my letters requesting CPR information and while they record 'Hello' letters and such like sent to me, there is no mention of either Cabot or Morgans responding to my CPR requests as they claim and my guess is that they were ignored. Similarly, data states receiving my letter requesting the Notice of Assignment but again. nothing shows that this was also ignored. If these items were sent ... then why then does their data not say so?

Despite their claims, there is also mention of something listed as a 'goodbye letter' and another referred to as a 'lazy letter' that they note were sent to me but I have no clue what these are. There is also a note stating they had applied to Norwich Charging Order Unit, but this is later referred to as an 'error - wrong account noted'.

There is an entry that states 'Judgement type number 5' - Any ideas? Another entry states 'CPC claim with Charging order as proposed enforcement action'.

From time-to-time the data mentions 'interest applied' but also entries that say 'interest amended from 0% to 0%'. Strange!

Attached to the bundle is a photocopy (or facsimile) of what is claimed to be a 'Receivables Sales Agreement' that contains 43 pages, the majority of them redacted. There is nothing on this so-called document to suggest it is anything other than a template document and it contains no account number of anything else to connect it to me or to any account I may have had.

There are also 'representations' of a Cabot letter and a facsimile letter of a letter on plain paper purported to be from Capital One. There are similar documents for the second account that they have lumped on the same POC. There are several pages containing a single line with a balance that I guess they are claiming represent statements but they mean nothing and there is a facsimile page of 'Information' that is meant to apply to a Cabot assignment notice.

The letter from Morgans states that this bundle is 'The Letters Before Action suffice as evidence of a demand for payment prior to the issue of proceedings' but I can find nothing that can reasonably be termed as evidence whatsoever. They have also stated that a 'clearer copy of agreement has been requested' from one of the two accounts and anticipate disclosing this shortly and that a 'redacted copy' of the other account sale agreement is being retrieved from their store.

Morgans are remain adamant that they have previously satisfied my CPR 31.14 requests - despite no record of this on their computer print-out - but I can categorically state that I have never received any of the information requested.

It would be an understatement to say that this whole bundle of documents contains nothing that I can see as useful in proving a case. To the contrary, it appears to me that they are merely demonstrating how they have failed to comply with the law and to follow correct procedure.

My hearing by the way is set for June.

Thanks consumeredge ... greatly appreciated. I have print outs of about a dozen pages from their computer for each account (something like 650 entries I guess) that I haven't had the opportunity to scrutinize fully yet.buy will hopefully tomorrow. I have to do this when my wife is at work otherwise the panic sets in and as you might appreciate she can't cope with all this pressure - and I am starting to get the same as I am not in brilliant health. Cabot used to call me several times a day at my business (when I had it) and after taking a few calls with other people present including the occasional client I informed them in writing to only deal with me by letter as I was not prepared to discuss anything concerning financial matters on the telephone. This probably goes back about 2-3 years even more. I have a feeling that I was wrongly sold PPI on both of these accounts so need to establish this but all the statements got mixed up and lost somewhere along the line when I had to move out of my premises in a hurry.

The thing is, if the DCAs played by the rules and did not employ threatening and harassing tactics it might have been possible to deal with these problems sooner rather than later when they arose - but they never do this and seldom will respond to letters as we all know. The entire ethos of DCAs needs addressing by the Government and the Financial Ombudsman with view to outlawing this entire evil industry and make the banks pay for their own irresponsibilty of lending too much without adequate checks. Okay, I accept that we must also take responsibility but it begars belief how a DCA can pay something like 10p in the £1 for buying a credit card debt and be legally entitled to pursue you for the original amount by any means that they choose plus interest. It does not seem right in contract law let alone moralistically. But before the laws change (if they do) we have to stick together to fight the bastards. Sorry for the rant!