Hi VJohn82 When you say that you have many cases, may I ask what you do ( not meaning to be rude or nozy ) , please ?

Thanks VJohn82. Well. This DCA says that they have purchased the account. So, would you enlighten me on the correct legal procedure of assignement of a liability, please ?

Looking at the letter from the DCA again, I find it strange that they claim to have "purchased my Mastercard from the original lender". There had been two other DCAs who wrote to me about this matter prior to this DCA taking over. I am unclear on this chain of DCAs. Does a DCA return the claim to the original lender that then resells it to another DCA ? If it doesn't, how could this DCA claim to have purchased the debt from the original lender if it had been handled or purchased by two DCAs before ? As to posting the letter, I'd rather not do this at this stage. Apologies if that is preventing you lot from giving your helpful advices. They are much appreciated. I take it that DCAs don't (shouldn't) have blank letterheads of original lenders to write anything they liked on (including "reconstitued" Notice of Assignments ) nor do they have lenders' authority to do so. If the DCAs is printing the letterheads off the lenders' website, it could be considered as a rather dubious way of going about their business, couldn't it ? There is a signature of the Collections Manager at the end but no printed name. And it's impossible to decipher the name from the signature. One other interesting feature of the letter is that the text for the name of the lender and the bit right at the bottom that gives the registered address, etc is in blue while the contents of the letter is in black. This may be totally irrelevant but thought I'd mention this.

Thanks noomillo060 I somehow feel that it would not be safe to post the letter as we never know who is reading . Here is the verbatim text of the letter written on what appears to be the lender's letterhead. Do DCAs keep lender's blank letterheads that they can use as and when they want to ? "We hereby give you notice of the assignment of debt due by you in respect of the outstanding balance on your (lender). On (date) your credit card account was assigned to (DCA) who are now the legal owners of the debt. All further communication must therefore be addressed to (DCA) at the address below : xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx

Received a what the DCA says is a "reconstituted" Notice of Assignment. They have also managed to write it on the original lender's letterhead. By definition, it is a Notice of Assignment that they have made up themselves, isn't it ? If I'm right, how did they produce it on the lender's letterhead ? How valid is a reconstituted N.O.A ?

have been sent a what is described by the DCA as a "reconstituted" version of a Notice of Assignment. They have even managed to write it on what appears to be the original lender's letterhead. Any thoughts on that, anybody ?

Thanks to all contributors. What is SARS ? Trigger1

Hi dx100uk If you last entry is for me, is it the increasing debt that you are referring to and I did not give clear explanations about ? Cabot are adding interest to the liability that they 'purchased' or was assigned to them ( it may be the former ) and have been doing so ever since they purchased the debt. Therefore, the debt is increasing all the time. If, as you suggest, I ignore them, the balance will grow to a phenomenal amount with compound interest. And if they eventually make a successful claim for the debt, I'll have to pay a very substantial amount to them for a liability that started as a couple of grand in 2000. I hope that I've made sense this time. I thank all the contributors to this thread. Trigger1

Hi Dx100uk Thanks for your words of support. What I cannot ( although perhaps I should ) get out of my mind is that this is a increasing debt in the eyes of Cabot. What if they succeed in enforcing the debt. I dread to think what the eventual sum owed will be with compounding interest. Trigger1

Hi dx100uk Cabot have actually applied interest ever since they claimed to have been in ownership of the liability as the sum they claim I owe is now double since the debt was with the original creditor. Are they therefore acting in contravention of the CCA 1974 ? If so, how can I raise ( should I ? )this matter with them ? I haven't made a payment to them or the creditor since 2003 but have been corresponding with them perhaps implying liability for the debt.

Can anyone enlighten me on the right of DCAs to charge interest on an account after it has been assigned to them or they have purchased it, please ? Also, does a debtor have a better footing with an assigned or purchased debt ? I have never seen an assignment contract between original lender and assignee. Has anyone got a copy that could be viewed ? Also, as a CA needs to have certain ingredients prescribed by the CCA 1974 to be valid, what should an assignement contain without which it could not be deemed to be legitimate ?

Thanks cerberusalert. Trigger1

Hi Dx100uk Again, thanks for your reply. I thought that stature barred can only come into play when there has been no correspondence, not payment to the creditor, between claimant and debtor. I may be wrong, of course. If that is the case, then statute barred cannot apply here, can it, as Cabot has been writing annually to the date to remind me of the liabililty. It statute barred confines a debt to oblivion because of the non existence of financial transactions which I take to mean payments to the creditor or DCA, then I shall have to wait till 2010. I have had no feedback on the right of a DCA to apply interest charges to an account that they have bought or taken an assignment on. I appreciate your comments which I take to be firm advice on my legal position unless I hear otherwise from you or anyone else who may wish to contribute. Trigger1

Hi dx10uk Thanks for reply. Excuse my ignorance but what do you mean by phishing ? As for the debt, it is a credit card advance that dates back to sometime between 2000 and 2002. I think it was started to get interest-free funding to clear other high-interest account(s) Cabot claims to own the debt now . I am not sure whether they purchased the debt or it was assigned (I assume there is a difference between the two. If so, could someone explain, please ?). The worrying thing is that Cabot has been adding interest all along. What was a balance of just under £2K has now turned into over £3,500. Are DCAs allowed to charge interest to a debt that they have purchased or has been assigned to them ? Whether they are or are not at all, should this freedom to charge interest not be prescribed in the original credit agreement ? If it isn't, could I challenge this interest application ? Moving onto the CA, an old copy that I have ( I don't remember signing anything else ) says at the top that it is an application form. I have read about that application forms are just that. They cannot be credit agreements. True ? Am a bit confused here. The application form that I have does have a small box on the same page that says : "This is a credit agreement registered by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Sign it only if you want to be bound by its terms." I have signed in that box. I hope that I have given enough information on the debt to receive advice, particularly from any members who are well versed in law. Regards Trigger1

When Cabot wrote to me about a debt that they claimed to have purchased, I replied that " the information that I have suggests that I do not have this liability" In response to that, they informed me that they were going to obtain a copy of my credit agreement from the original lender. I didn't actually ask them to do that. However, over 30 days have now elapsed without any sign of a credit agreement. Cabot have been writing more than once saying that they have asked for the CA from the original lender as a matter of urgency but are still waiting. Cabot are being very polite and apologetic about the delay but the point is : I did not specifically asked for the CA, mention the relevant clauses of the CCA 1974 referring to their obligations to provide me with the CA in my letter to them or send the obligatory £1. If I haven't done the three things mentioned above, can they claim that I did not comply with the format normally required for a request of a CA and the request is therefore invalid ? They haven't actually said so. Would it be advisable to start the request for a CA but, this time, mention the relevant sections of the CCA 1974 ( 78, I believe ) and send in the £1 ? But by doing so, would that take me back to the start of the request process and give them 12 days to respond although the fact is that they haven't been able to provide a copy of the CA for the past 30 days ? Can I now state that the CA is unenforceable as Cabot have not produced a copy of the CA, although I did not actually ask for one, 30 days after they decided to seek a copy of the CA from the original lender ? They have told me that they will continue to seek the copy from the lender. They have suspended the account. They have said that as soon as they get the copy, they will re-start their collection activities. Should I write to Trading Standards ? If so, why ? Could I now ask Cabot to close the account as further attempts to ask for payments from me would be unlawful ? If they produce the CA, are they able to continue asking for payments ? Another thing is : what should I look for in a credit agreement that would make it unenforceable ? Precise advice on what makes an agreement invalid or unenforceable ( if there is a difference ) would be most welcome. Trigger.