Jump to content


Letter from Cabot re CCA Help please


Bada Bing
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5467 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

I have been dealing with Cabot over a debt they say I owe them from MBNA. I sent them a CCA request which was delivered to them on 29 September 2008. I heard nothing until 13 November 2008 when I received a copy of an application form, together with a letter dated 10 November 2008, purporting to be from MBNA and saying that the debt was assigned to Cabot.

 

I replied to say that as they had sent me an application form they had not fulflilled my request under the act and that unless they did supply one they were committing an offence by still asking me for payment. I also asked them how whwn the assignment letter was dated 10 November, were they authorised to request me to pay them before this date.

 

I have today receieved the following reply:

 

Our response to your letter

I refer to your letters dated 19th September and 8t" December 2008, and our letters dated 1St October, 13t" October, 24th October, 6t" November and 13th November 2008.

You have stated that Cabot has not provided you with a copy of the credit agreement. However please be advised that although the original copy may not be available, MBNA has supplied Cabot with a copy of the original which you signed and satisfies all requirements of both MBNA and Cabot. Under section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 it states "the creditor... shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any)" and stress the words "if any". Cabot has been provided with a copy of the agreement from MBNA and therefore, this satisfies all obligations of both parties.

For your ease of reference please find enclosed a further copy of the credit agreement that you signed and agreed to with the original lender. Please note that on the copy of this agreement, your signature is supported by the statement "This is a Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Sign it only if you want to be legally bound by its terms". You shall also note on the credit agreement that under the heading "Declaration" it states "Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974", Therefore, this constitutes a valid credit agreement, which is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and under the terms of the agreement.

With regards to the requirements of the agreement regulations 198311553 concerning the form and content of the agreement, these regulations do not deal with this matter, as it is the CCA that deals with this matter as primary legislation. Section 189(4) of the CCA states:

A document embodies a provision if the provision is set out either in the document itself or in another document referred to in it."

Section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act, which deals with the "signing of document" states

"A regulated agreement is not properly executed unless

(a) A document in the prescribed form itself containing all the prescribed terms and conforming to the regulations (Consumer Credit (Agreement) Regulations 1983) under section 60(1) is signed in the prescribed manner both by the debtor...

(b) The document embodies all the terms of the agreement, other than the implied terms..."

The word "embodies" means that the document need not set out all the terms itself, but may refer to another document setting out the terms under section 189 (4). In this instance on the application form it is clear that the Terms and Conditions are mentioned in the Declaration box and therefore you are incorrect in stating that the agreement cannot be set out in different documents.

As to prescribed terms, this is covered in section 61(a), above, where it mentions, "contains". The terms and conditions have set out all the prescribed terms as required under the Consumer Credit (Agreement) Regulations 1983 and therefore there can be no argument as to the validity of the form and content of the agreement.

 

With regards to your query relating to the notice of assignment of your debt, please note that the c , ,

November 2008 was a representation of the letter originally sent on 20th September 2001, as stated clearly at the top of the letter.

In conclusion, we are perfectly within our rights to enforce the debt against you as your arguments are clearly unfounded and you have no basis for your dispute or claim for failing to pay the outstanding balance under the credit agreement. Regrettably, if no payment arrangement to settle your outstanding balance is forthcoming within 14 days, we shall have no other option but to escalate your account in our collection process. Therefore, I would recommend you contact us on 0845 0700 116 in order to discuss the options available to you in settling the outstanding balance of £4705.66 on your account. Interest has been accruing on your account, but has yet to be added to the outstanding total.

If you have any other queries in relation to the above account, please do not hesitate to contact me on 0845 026 0463. The Customer Assurance department is open from 9am to 5pm Monday to Friday.

Yours sincerely

 

Steve Perring

Customer Assurance Adviser

 

 

The copy of the "credit agreement" they refer to is the same application form they sent before. I've attached what they sent as pdf files which are hard to read, even as originals, but even the words "Application Form" appear at the bottom of the page)

 

I am going to reply to the letter but would appreciate some help with the points they have raised regarding the legality of the document as a credit agreement.

 

Any help you can give would be very much appreciated.

 

 

Thanks.

 

BB

Cabot(MBNA) Appn p 2.pdf

Cabot(MBNA) appn p1.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

this is thenormal cabot speak

smoke and mirrors me thinks

boy are they poor copies

are the ones you have just as bad

have you had an answer on the agreement by caggers yet, i know a lot of mbna agreements are the pitts

until they send a readable copy they have not complied with your cca request and can take a running jump

 

you will get more comments on the cabot letter ime sure

pure fiction

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bada Bing

 

I'm reading through a copy of that letter from Cabot now, and will comment back here soon. Meanwhile, give yourself some additional encouragement and light relief by visiting this site: Cabot Financial - How they treat one of their customers.

 

More soon, Vex

If my advice or input has helped, by all means tip my scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

this is thenormal cabot speak

smoke and mirrors me thinks

boy are they poor copies

are the ones you have just as bad

have you had an answer on the agreement by caggers yet, i know a lot of mbna agreements are the pitts

until they send a readable copy they have not complied with your cca request and can take a running jump

 

you will get more comments on the cabot letter ime sure

pure fiction

 

The copies are just as bad! This is what they sent me in reply to my letter telling them that they had sent me an application form and that it did not satisfy my request for a CCA. It even says "Application Form" at the bottom!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bada Bing

 

I'm reading through a copy of that letter from Cabot now, and will comment back here soon. Meanwhile, give yourself some additional encouragement and light relief by visiting this site: Cabot Financial - How they treat one of their customers.

 

More soon, Vex

 

Thanks very much. I appreciate that.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Bada Bing

 

First of all, I’d always expect a DCA, or even the original creditor to dispute your claimed position. Expect this to happen once or perhaps twice. You should see these as efforts to try and convince you that all you have researched and all that you have been told is full of errors and inaccuracies.

 

I expect this kind of aggressive behaviour from DCA’s to continue with greater frequency. As more people challenge their debts, the DCA’s are being pushed into a corner and their collecting is becoming harder.

 

Taking their letter in order:

 

“However please be advised that although the original copy may not be available, MBNA has supplied Cabot with a copy of the original which you signed and satisfies all requirements of both MBNA and Cabot.

 

In my opinion this is deliberately mischievous, and tells you nothing. It claims that all requirements are satisfied. It is an irrelevant point.

 

Under section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 it states "the creditor... shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any)" and stress the words "if any". Cabot has been provided with a copy of the agreement from MBNA and therefore, this satisfies all obligations of both parties.

 

First of all, their line on “if any”. In other words, if there isn’t any, then there will be nothing to give the debtor, and nothing more can be done.

 

Secondly, they state that Cabot has been supplied with a copy of the agreement from MBNA, and satisifies all abligations of both parties. This is another load of nonsense. It may well satisfy each of them, but is has not satisfied your request and will not satisfy a judge.

 

Now onto the rest of the letter from these credit perverts….

 

This is a Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Sign it only if you want to be legally bound by its terms". You shall also note on the credit agreement that under the heading "Declaration" it states "Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974", Therefore, this constitutes a valid credit agreement, which is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and under the terms of the agreement”.

"With regards to the requirements of the agreement regulations 198311553 concerning the form and content of the agreement, these regulations do not deal with this matter, as it is the CCA that deals with this matter as primary legislation. Section 189(4) of the CCA states:"

 

I will not give them the benefit of the doubt that the additional 1 in there is a typo. SI 1983 1553 DOES apply. They are talking B***S***. So that you are completely happy that you are not being fed nonsense, the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) DO apply……………

 

 

For an agreement to be compliant with the regulations it MUST embody WITHIN the agreement, the prescribed terms laid out in the SI1983/1553 without the prescribed terms the agreement does not conform to section 60(1) 1974 and therefore cannot be properly executed as described in section 61(1) CCA 1974.

For your information in case you are unsure. The prescribed terms referred to are contained in schedule 6 column 2 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and are inter alia: - A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or that there is no credit limit, A term stating the rate of any interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement and A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following--

(a)Number of repayments;

(b)Amount of repayments;

©Frequency and timing of repayments;

(d)Dates of repayments;

(e)The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable.

 

The copies that you have attached to your thread are woefully short of having any of this in one document. Without being able to read the text (because of the poor copy) there isn’t even enough words for a start. Perhaps they have one in braile !!!!

 

Just so that there is no room for confusion, and this bit always helped me in my endeavours for a debt free existence……

 

The person who wrote the Consumer Credit Act 1974 sets it out quite nicely, and as this has been copied into this site on many, many threads…

 

“As the draftsman of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 I would like to thank Dr Richard Lawson for his interesting and well-argued article (30 August 2003) on Wilson v First County Trust Ltd [2003] UKHL 40, [2003] 4 All ER 97.

Dr Lawson may be interested to know that I included the provision in question (section 127(3)) entirely on my own initiative. It seemed right to me that if the creditor company couldn’t be bothered to ensure that all the prescribed particulars were accurately included in the credit agreement it deserved to find it unenforceable, and that the court should not have power to relieve it from this penalty. Nobody queried this, and it went through Parliament without debate. I’m glad the House of Lords has now vindicated my reasoning and confirmed that nobody’s human rights were infringed.” - 167 Justice of the Peace (2003) 773.

 

The agreement cannot be set out in separate documents. It has to be within the ‘frame’ of one – complete – in other words their fanciful words in their point (b) are the words of a desperate drone.

 

Hope that makes sense. Apologies if there are any typos of my own. I've been cutting and pasting

 

 

Cheers, Vex

  • Haha 2

If my advice or input has helped, by all means tip my scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Bada Bing

 

First of all, I’d always expect a DCA, or even the original creditor to dispute your claimed position. Expect this to happen once or perhaps twice. You should see these as efforts to try and convince you that all you have researched and all that you have been told is full of errors and inaccuracies.

 

I expect this kind of aggressive behaviour from DCA’s to continue with greater frequency. As more people challenge their debts, the DCA’s are being pushed into a corner and their collecting is becoming harder.

 

Taking their letter in order:

 

“However please be advised that although the original copy may not be available, MBNA has supplied Cabot with a copy of the original which you signed and satisfies all requirements of both MBNA and Cabot.

 

In my opinion this is deliberately mischievous, and tells you nothing. It claims that all requirements are satisfied. It is an irrelevant point.

 

Under section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 it states "the creditor... shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any)" and stress the words "if any". Cabot has been provided with a copy of the agreement from MBNA and therefore, this satisfies all obligations of both parties.

 

First of all, their line on “if any”. In other words, if there isn’t any, then there will be nothing to give the debtor, and nothing more can be done.

 

Secondly, they state that Cabot has been supplied with a copy of the agreement from MBNA, and satisifies all abligations of both parties. This is another load of nonsense. It may well satisfy each of them, but is has not satisfied your request and will not satisfy a judge.

 

Now onto the rest of the letter from these credit perverts….

 

This is a Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Sign it only if you want to be legally bound by its terms". You shall also note on the credit agreement that under the heading "Declaration" it states "Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974", Therefore, this constitutes a valid credit agreement, which is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and under the terms of the agreement”.

"With regards to the requirements of the agreement regulations 198311553 concerning the form and content of the agreement, these regulations do not deal with this matter, as it is the CCA that deals with this matter as primary legislation. Section 189(4) of the CCA states:"

 

I will not give them the benefit of the doubt that the additional 1 in there is a typo. SI 1983 1553 DOES apply. They are talking B***S***. So that you are completely happy that you are not being fed nonsense, the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) DO apply……………

 

 

For an agreement to be compliant with the regulations it MUST embody WITHIN the agreement, the prescribed terms laid out in the SI1983/1553 without the prescribed terms the agreement does not conform to section 60(1) 1974 and therefore cannot be properly executed as described in section 61(1) CCA 1974.

 

For your information in case you are unsure. The prescribed terms referred to are contained in schedule 6 column 2 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and are inter alia: - A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or that there is no credit limit, A term stating the rate of any interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement and A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following--

(a)Number of repayments;

(b)Amount of repayments;

©Frequency and timing of repayments;

(d)Dates of repayments;

(e)The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable.

 

The copies that you have attached to your thread are woefully short of having any of this in one document. Without being able to read the text (because of the poor copy) there isn’t even enough words for a start. Perhaps they have one in braile !!!!

 

Just so that there is no room for confusion, and this bit always helped me in my endeavours for a debt free existence……

 

The person who wrote the Consumer Credit Act 1974 sets it out quite nicely, and as this has been copied into this site on many, many threads…

 

“As the draftsman of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 I would like to thank Dr Richard Lawson for his interesting and well-argued article (30 August 2003) on Wilson v First County Trust Ltd [2003] UKHL 40, [2003] 4 All ER 97.

Dr Lawson may be interested to know that I included the provision in question (section 127(3)) entirely on my own initiative. It seemed right to me that if the creditor company couldn’t be bothered to ensure that all the prescribed particulars were accurately included in the credit agreement it deserved to find it unenforceable, and that the court should not have power to relieve it from this penalty. Nobody queried this, and it went through Parliament without debate. I’m glad the House of Lords has now vindicated my reasoning and confirmed that nobody’s human rights were infringed.” - 167 Justice of the Peace (2003) 773.

 

The agreement cannot be set out in separate documents. It has to be within the ‘frame’ of one – complete – in other words their fanciful words in their point (b) are the words of a desperate drone.

 

Hope that makes sense. Apologies if there are any typos of my own. I've been cutting and pasting

 

 

 

 

Cheers, Vex

 

Thanks so much for that Vex, it has confirmed what I had thought, that they are just trying it on. I really appreciate your time in replying. I will write back to them and let you know what they come up with next!

 

BB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any ideas as to how I should reply to this part?

"With regards to your query relating to the notice of assignment of your debt, please note that the copy sent to you on 13 November 2008 was a representation of the letter originally sent on 20th September 2001, as stated clearly at the top of the letter."

 

The letter they enclosed with the application form they sent was on MBNA headed paper, had an original signature from "Stuart Ashcroft Asset Sales Manager" and was dated 10 November 2008. Contrary to what they say above, there was nothing to say this was a "representation" of an original. What does this "representation" mean? Is this legal? I've looked on threads regarding assisgnment and think it isn't but would appreciate some clarification if anyone has any knowledge of this.

 

Thanks.

 

BB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Bada Bing

 

Between my last post and this i popped out to watch the football. I've had one too many beers by now (i know its early) to give you a decent response. I'll look at the next point that you have raised, and offer you my tip tomorrow.

 

Another link you kight like to cast you eye over on this site is via user 'Joe Blow' - former employee of MBNA:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mbna/129987-i-used-work-mbna.html?highlight=default

 

Logging back in tomorrow

 

Thanks, Vex

If my advice or input has helped, by all means tip my scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Bada Bing

 

Between my last post and this i popped out to watch the football. I've had one too many beers by now (i know its early) to give you a decent response. I'll look at the next point that you have raised, and offer you my tip tomorrow.

 

Another link you kight like to cast you eye over on this site is via user 'Joe Blow' - former employee of MBNA:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mbna/129987-i-used-work-mbna.html?highlight=default

 

Logging back in tomorrow

 

Thanks, Vex

 

Cheers, much appreciated. Hope you enyoyed the match! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any ideas as to how I should reply to this part?

"With regards to your query relating to the notice of assignment of your debt, please note that the copy sent to you on 13 November 2008 was a representation of the letter originally sent on 20th September 2001, as stated clearly at the top of the letter."

 

The letter they enclosed with the application form they sent was on MBNA headed paper, had an original signature from "Stuart Ashcroft Asset Sales Manager" and was dated 10 November 2008. Contrary to what they say above, there was nothing to say this was a "representation" of an original. What does this "representation" mean? Is this legal? I've looked on threads regarding assisgnment and think it isn't but would appreciate some clarification if anyone has any knowledge of this.

 

Thanks.

 

BB

 

Bada Bing

 

Taking this, together with what we have adressed, I propose the following draft for you. It contains the whole response. You should read through this, add adresses and dates etc DO NOT SIGN - DIGITAL SIGNATURES ONLY (i have a link to a CAG tutorial if you need to know how to do this) and ammend if you need to. You may need to, as I have made some assumptions in the latter part of the draft relating to the Default Notice. As I have no copy in front of me, AND as I doubt whether they can get a copy or indeed have one, AND because of their word 'representation' which implies a recreation.

 

Due credit to tomterm8, from who I have plagiarised his info on Default notice content.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------

 

Dear Mr Perring

 

Thank you for taking the time to draft your letter, postmark xx xxx 2008, and received by me on xx xxx 2008.

 

Taking the points that you have raised in order, here is my response. I feel obliged to notify you here that I intend this to be my final letter to you. My answers to your points will make the reason for this decision clear and unambiguous.

 

“However please be advised that although the original copy may not be available, MBNA has supplied Cabot with a copy of the original which you signed and satisfies all requirements of both MBNA and Cabot.

 

In my opinion, and that of people assisting me with this matter this is deliberately mischievous, and tells me nothing. It claims that all requirements are satisfied. My position is that this is an irrelevant point.

 

"With regards to the requirements of the agreement regulations 19831553 concerning the form and content of the agreement, these regulations do not deal with this matter, as it is the CCA that deals with this matter as primary legislation. Section 189(4) of the CCA states:"

 

For an agreement to be compliant with the regulations it MUST embody WITHIN the agreement, the prescribed terms laid out in the SI1983/1553 without the prescribed terms the agreement does not conform to section 60(1) 1974 and therefore cannot be properly executed as described in section 61(1) CCA 1974.

Let me make my point quite clear. To this end I will recite here a quote from the person who actually drafted the words of the Consumer Credit Act (as amended by certain Statutory Instruments including SI 1983 / 1553)………

 

“As the draftsman of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 I would like to thank Dr Richard Lawson for his interesting and well-argued article (30 August 2003) on Wilson v First County Trust Ltd [2003] UKHL 40, [2003] 4 All ER 97.

Dr Lawson may be interested to know that I included the provision in question (section 127(3)) entirely on my own initiative. It seemed right to me that if the creditor company couldn’t be bothered to ensure that all the prescribed particulars were accurately included in the credit agreement it deserved to find it unenforceable, and that the court should not have power to relieve it from this penalty. Nobody queried this, and it went through Parliament without debate. I’m glad the House of Lords has now vindicated my reasoning and confirmed that nobody’s human rights were infringed.” - 167 Justice of the Peace (2003) 773.

 

 

So, to date you have failed in your attempt to convince me that I owe any ‘debt’ to you, or any other agency or organisation on this matter.

 

Although, the remainder of this letter could be viewed as being academic – the ‘agreement’ is unenforceable, so whether or not a default notice was served upon me, and whether or not that default notice may or may not have contained the correct information is like your first point in your letter to me – irrelevant, I will still take the time to make this point clear also.

 

With regards to your query relating to the notice of assignment of your debt, please note that the c , ,November 2008 was a representation of the letter originally sent on 20th September 2001, as stated clearly at the top of the letter.

 

Before I jump straight to the information that must be contained in a default notice, again I must express with interest your choice of words. ‘Representation’ is indeed an interesting choice of words, and tells me that you are hiding the fact that what you are purporting to be a default notice, and one that applies to me, has been recreated, most likely not related to the ‘agreement’ to which you are contacting me.

 

The following information must be contained in the default notice:

I.a description of the agreement sufficient to identify it

II.the name and a postal address of the trader

III.the name and a postal address of the customer

IV.a statement that the notice is a default notice served under section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

V.details of the part or parts of the agreement which, according to the trader, the customer has breached

VI.details of the nature of the alleged breach of the agreement specifying clearly the matters complained of

VII.if it is possible for the customer to put the matter right, details of what he is required to do in order to achieve this, and the date before which he is required to do so. This date must be at least seven days after the date of service of the notice, or

VIII.if it is not possible to put the matter right (for example, where goods have been damaged beyond repair), details of the amount (if any) required to be paid as compensation and the date before which it should be paid. This date must be at least seven days (fourteen, if after 1st October 2006) after the date of service of the notice.

 

Point to note:

The date of service of the notice is the date on which the trader either delivers or sends the notice by post to the customer. Where a notice is sent by post, allowance should be made for delivery time when calculating the date by which the breach must be remedied.

Where any action is required under VII or VIII above, the following statement must appear immediately after:

 

IF THE ACTION REQUIRED BY THIS NOTICE IS TAKEN BEFORE THE DATE SHOWN NO FURTHER ENFORCEMENT ACTION WILL BE TAKEN IN RESPECT OF THE BREACH.

 

The following statement must appear immediately before the specification of the action to be taken by the trader:

IF YOU DO NOT TAKE THE ACTION REQUIRED BY THIS NOTICE BEFORE THE DATE SHOWN THEN THE FURTHER ACTION SET OUT BELOW MAY BE TAKEN AGAINST YOU [OR A SURETY]

 

The words in square brackets are to be omitted or deleted if it is not intended to take any action to enforce any security

 

In summary, as I have already made clear, I do not owe any debt to you. Your responses to me have proven that there are insufficient grounds for you to pursue your enquiry, and therefore I request that you now abstain from any further correspondence. Should you continue to pursue this, I WILL defend any actions that you may continue to pursue, AND I will consider actions of my own in lieu of that.

 

Your Faithfully

 

Bada Bing

If my advice or input has helped, by all means tip my scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Our response to your letter

I refer to your letters dated 19th September and 8t" December 2008, and our letters dated 1St October, 13t" October, 24th October, 6t" November and 13th November 2008.

You have stated that Cabot has not provided you with a copy of the credit agreement. However please be advised that although the original copy may not be available, MBNA has supplied Cabot with a copy of the original which you signed and satisfies all requirements of both MBNA and Cabot. Under section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 it states "the creditor... shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any)" and stress the words "if any".

 

Ok, i have an email here from Francis Bennion who was the drafts man of the Act, i have had much correspondance with him about the Act. Francis stated the words (IF ANY) should be read as if there never was a signed agreement and only if , would the lender be released from their statutory obligations.so Mr P is talking dribble

 

 

Cabot has been provided with a copy of the agreement from MBNA and therefore, this satisfies all obligations of both parties.

For your ease of reference please find enclosed a further copy of the credit agreement that you signed and agreed to with the original lender. Please note that on the copy of this agreement, your signature is supported by the statement "This is a Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Sign it only if you want to be legally bound by its terms". You shall also note on the credit agreement that under the heading "Declaration" it states "Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974", Therefore, this constitutes a valid credit agreement, which is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and under the terms of the agreement. Utter nonsense,

 

With regards to the requirements of the agreement regulations 198311553 concerning the form and content of the agreement, these regulations do not deal with this matter, as it is the CCA that deals with this matter as primary legislation. Section 189(4) of the CCA states:

A document embodies a provision if the provision is set out either in the document itself or in another document referred to in it."

 

what?? hmm one has to ask what version of the CCA he is reading from

 

Section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act, which deals with the "signing of document" states

"A regulated agreement is not properly executed unless

(a) A document in the prescribed form itself containing all the prescribed terms and conforming to the regulations (Consumer Credit (Agreement) Regulations 1983) under section 60(1) is signed in the prescribed manner both by the debtor...

(b) The document embodies all the terms of the agreement, other than the implied terms..."

The word "embodies" means that the document need not set out all the terms itself, but may refer to another document setting out the terms under section 189 (4). In this instance on the application form it is clear that the Terms and Conditions are mentioned in the Declaration box and therefore you are incorrect in stating that the agreement cannot be set out in different documents.

As to prescribed terms, this is covered in section 61(a), above, where it mentions, "contains". The terms and conditions have set out all the prescribed terms as required under the Consumer Credit (Agreement) Regulations 1983 and therefore there can be no argument as to the validity of the form and content of the agreement.

 

Im getting bored with this pillock now, refer him to Goode Consumer Credit Law and Practice Vol 2 page 318, that gives the true definition and correct interpretation of what the two sections mean

 

all you need to do is look at s127(3) CCA, it mentions sod all about section 61(1)(B) the "Embodies" part but it does refer to section 61(1)(a) which deals with the key word CONTAINS..

 

if the agreement does not contain the prescribed terms its improperly executed. it may embody the other terms of agreement but it must contain the prescribed terms

With regards to your query relating to the notice of assignment of your debt, please note that the c , ,

November 2008 was a representation of the letter originally sent on 20th September 2001, as stated clearly at the top of the letter.

In conclusion, we are perfectly within our rights to enforce the debt against you as your arguments are clearly unfounded and you have no basis for your dispute or claim for failing to pay the outstanding balance under the credit agreement. Regrettably, if no payment arrangement to settle your outstanding balance is forthcoming within 14 days, we shall have no other option but to escalate your account in our collection process. Therefore, I would recommend you contact us on 0845 0700 116 in order to discuss the options available to you in settling the outstanding balance of £4705.66 on your account. Interest has been accruing on your account, but has yet to be added to the outstanding total.

If you have any other queries in relation to the above account, please do not hesitate to contact me on 0845 026 0463. The Customer Assurance department is open from 9am to 5pm Monday to Friday.

Yours sincerely

 

Steve Perring

Customer Assurance Adviser

 

 

:)

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Please see previous correspondence with Cabot on this. They are still arguing that they sent me a valid credit agreement when they quite plainly did not. I've attached their latest letter and would be very grateful for any advice on how I should reply please.

 

Many thanks.

 

BB

Cabot 8 April 09.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

tell them to take you to court if they think all is in order.

 

 

Nott

 

I think they know they have nothing and it's just typical scare tactics but it's always good to hear the views of others on here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had pretty much the same letter from Cabot, I am going to wait and see what comes next, seen as it is the last correspondence from them on the matter lol

 

 

 

Regards

 

David

 

I think so too, lol. They will however "as a gesture of goodwill" wait 14 days though:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...