Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • when did they (who) inform you there was a 'police case' and when was this attained? i will guess the debt is now SB'd as it's UAE 15yrs. have you informed the bsnk ever by email/letter of your correct and current address? you can always ignore anyone else accept the bank,  Block and bounce back all emails. Block any text messages  Ignore any letters unless it's: - a Statutory Demand - a Letter Of Claim - a Court Claimform via Northants bulk.  
    • I left Dubai 8 years ago and intended to return. However a job prospect fell through. I’d been there for 15 years. I decided to pay my credit card and the bank had frozen my account. There is no means to pay the CC so completely unable to pay when I wanted to other than the bank advising me to ask a friend in the UAE to pay it on my behalf!  fast forward bank informs there is a police case against me for non payment. Years later IDR chased me and after months/ years they stopped. Now Judge & Priestley are trying their luck. Now I have received an email in English and Arabic from JP saying the bank has authorised them to collect debts. Is this the same as IDR although I didn’t receive anything like this from them. Just says they are authorised?
    • The neighbour's house is built right on the boundary so the side of their house is effectively the 'wall' in our garden separating the two properties. It's a three storey house and so the mortar poses a potential danger to us. Because of the danger, we have put up an interior fence in our garden to ensure we don't risk mortar dropping on us. That reduces the garden by 25% which is not only an inconvenience, but it's the part of the garden where we had lined up contractors to install a patio and gazebo which we will use for our wedding reception in less than 2 months. We have spoken to the neighbour's caretaker who is on the case, has spoken with a roofer and possibly a scaffolding company, but there are several issues. They don't seem to understand the urgency. As long as there is a risk of falling mortar, we can't carry out any work in the garden, and unless they hurry up, we're looking at cancelling our wedding as it's not viable to book a venue because we can't use our own garden! Also, they want to put the scaffolding up in our garden which would be ok with us if it was a matter of a few days and they hurried up, but there is a tree (most likely protected by the conservation area), so most likely they can only reach part of the roof with the scaffolding if they put it up in our garden. We suggested a roofer with a cherry picker but they seem to want to use a company they've used before. Any and all comments, suggestions, advice is more than welcome.  PS. does it make any difference that the neighbour is a business (ltd) and not a private dwelling?
    • No apology needed, thank you for what you do I am glad to hear they paid. well done on getting back what is yours
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Cabot disputing Statute Barred status - what next?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5498 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

Would you believe these morons have passed it on to another DCA?!!!

 

That's while it's being investigated by the FOS!!!

 

I've had it with these a*seholes

 

I'm not bothering to send them a reply I'll just ignore everything they send and when there's a big enough pile I'll send it all to the OFT.

 

Cheers all

 

H

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi All

 

Could Cabot be trying to bullsh*t me (surely they wouldn't stoop so low!?) H

 

 

Surely they will and do-frequently apparently!

Redletter

 

 

'I believe the struggle for financial freedom is unfair - I believe the only ones who disagree are millionaires!'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just noticed more Cabot confusion in Sam Moore's letter:

 

Please be advised that the OFT Debt Collection Guidance remains a guidance which is followed by the Industry and should not be confused with actual law.

 

Compliance with the OFT Guidance is, of course, a condition of the consumer credit licence that DCAs need. As members of the risible CSA, Cabot have to follow their code too, which includes compliance with the Guidance. Failing to comply with a code of practice to which they have subscribed is contrary to CPUTR. Perhaps all this just slipped Mr Moore's mind?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well they already know it's SB and that the FOS are investigating, which is why I'm amazed at their gall (or is it incompetence?)

 

I'm not willing to spend time and money writing to them re-stating for the umpteenth time the reasons that I won't be paying.

 

When the investigation by the FOS is over I'll be forwarding all correspondence to the OFT and any one else I think will be interested :-)

 

H

 

sounds like a plan my friend ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you believe these morons have passed it on to another DCA?!!!

 

That's while it's being investigated by the FOS!!!

 

I've had it with these a*seholes

 

I'm not bothering to send them a reply I'll just ignore everything they send and when there's a big enough pile I'll send it all to the OFT.

 

Cheers all

 

H

 

I am a great believer in telling DCAs your position once and once only. If they continue to send their pathetic begging letters then just forward them to the OFT as the basis of a complaint.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolutely agree with ODC ignore them completely now. In many ways it would be good to push them and let them start legal action as they will get a right caning. BTW who is this new DCA? Bet it's just an offshoot of Cabot.

 

The OFT are onto these cretins and pursuing statute barred debts. Have a look at this. Useful even gives you the name of the person to complain to.

The Office of Fair Trading: OFT imposes requirements on Mackenzie Hall to improve handling of disputed debts

http://www.oft.gov.uk/news/press/2009/44-09

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats great news Rhia! Lets hope Crapbot are next for their @sses kicking!

Redletter

 

 

'I believe the struggle for financial freedom is unfair - I believe the only ones who disagree are millionaires!'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Rhia that's really useful to know :o)

 

I am sending (just one) letter to these bumholes saying that is statute barred and I'm not paying - the usual thing.

 

When they reply with another threatomatic I will send everything I've got, including all my correspondence with Crap pot, to the address on that link, hopefully lighting the blue touch paper and retiring to a safe distance to watch the fireworks!!!

 

This is fun!

 

H

Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW the DCA is called Financial Investigations and Recoveries (Europe) which they have ever so cleverly condensed into a handy little acronym: FIRE

 

Perhaps that should be FIRED as in YOU ARE!

 

I think a liitle typo in the address line of my letter to their head office may just happen to appear :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

FIRE is Cabot's DCA. Is it based at Rugby? Used to be in same office as Hodson's solicitors. Now the two solicitors who handled all the Cabot crap at Hodson's have formed a new company called Morgan's they have moved elsewhere in Rugby.

A cynic would say there were too many complaints going into the Law Society and the Legal Execs body about Hodson's that they had to reinvent themselves. Cabot has also taken the op in-house so may well be a massive cost saving too.

FIRE used to be a dormant company so they must have revived it. Magnificent. Keep feeding them line HS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FIRE is Cabot's DCA. Is it based at Rugby? Used to be in same office as Hodson's solicitors. Now the two solicitors who handled all the Cabot crap at Hodson's have formed a new company called Morgan's they have moved elsewhere in Rugby.

A cynic would say there were too many complaints going into the Law Society and the Legal Execs body about Hodson's that they had to reinvent themselves. Cabot has also taken the op in-house so may well be a massive cost saving too.

FIRE used to be a dormant company so they must have revived it. Magnificent. Keep feeding them line HS.

 

So is this yet another third party with whom they are illegally sharing ones data???? Or is FIRE part of Crap bot?

Redletter

 

 

'I believe the struggle for financial freedom is unfair - I believe the only ones who disagree are millionaires!'

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's part of the Cabot group of companies. However it is a seperate company. Best check ICO to see if it is registered as a data pocessor in it's own right or is it under Cabot's license.

 

If it's own right then the data sharing argument can be raised. Mosdt of the time they don't have permission to share anyone's data as they don't have any agreements.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's part of the Cabot group of companies. However it is a seperate company. Best check ICO to see if it is registered as a data pocessor in it's own right or is it under Cabot's license.

 

If it's own right then the data sharing argument can be raised. Mosdt of the time they don't have permission to share anyone's data as they don't have any agreements.

 

 

Seems no matter how they "repackage" themselves (Hodsons/Morgans or Cabot/Fired) it's still the same bunch of cowboys in the outfits!! :rolleyes:

 

Some people NEVER learn do they? :confused:

 

I reckon when these people were told to go queue for brains - they went and stood on platform waiting for trains :lol: numpties!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW just had a look at the Register of Data Controllers; nothing under the postcode on their letter, but search under Financial Investigations and Recoveries (Europe) and - what a surprise - yes you've guessed it Crap Pots West Malling address appears - well I s'pose they've gotta park their horses somewhere!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems no matter how they "repackage" themselves (Hodsons/Morgans or Cabot/Fired) it's still the same bunch of cowboys in the outfits!! :rolleyes:

 

Some people NEVER learn do they? :confused:

 

I reckon when these people were told to go queue for brains - they went and stood on platform waiting for trains :lol: numpties!!

 

Oh yes they are a shower of cowboys alright. Look at their leader

 

kenmaynard.jpg

  • Haha 1

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi Everyone

 

Great news

 

Crap pot have finally backed down :o)

 

Here's a bit of the letter I got today

 

Reviewing your account

 

I refer to a letter written on your behalf by the Financial Ombudsman Service,...

 

I understand your complaint relates to your belief that the above account may be statute barred.

 

On investigating this matter, I can advise that your above referenced account is statute barred and so governed by the Limitation Act 1980. Under the OFT guidelines it is accepted that legally the debt still exists but that collections of these debts must in no way be contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of Justice Act 1970.

 

Cabot Financial takes these guidelines very seriously and whilst we do not consider our actions to have breached any law or regulatory guideline, we confirm that this account has been withdrawn from our regular collections process.

 

I trust we have set out our position clearly.

 

If you have any further queries in relation to the above account, please do not hesitate to contact me blah blah blah

 

I sort of knew they would have to, but it's really nice to get the letter - even though they don't apologise or admit they were wrong..

 

Anyway just wanted to say a big thank you to everyone who has contributed to this thread and helped me out with advice etc, and to anyone who is going through a similar situation I would just like to say:

 

Don't let the b*astards grind you down!!!!

 

They are a bunch of bloodsuckers and they are just chancing their arms to try to get you to pay up DON'T GIVE IN!!!

 

Now I'm sending everything I've got to the OFT

 

Thanks again

 

 

H

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just knew they would withdraw. This has been going on with people all over CAG - some have even got to court.

 

Their letter and pathetic defence of their actions is complete hogwash. SB is SB and that's it and they have no business trying to harrass you into paying them something they aren't entitled to.

 

Keep that letter safe but continue with your complaints to TS etc and give 'em a parting kick in the pants.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Under the OFT guidelines it is accepted that legally the debt still exists but that collections of these debts must in no way be contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of Justice Act 1970.

 

 

This would be the same Cabot Farcical that state S 40 (1) of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 does not exist:eek::rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Done,

Now you can ask the ombudsman why they are not investigating removing their licence to operate.

Maybe a wasted costs order?

Certainly agree with Rhia in regards the kick in the pants, but make sure you kick long and hard,

Maybe you can harrass them as much as they did you,

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just knew they would withdraw. This has been going on with people all over CAG - some have even got to court.

 

Their letter and pathetic defence of their actions is complete hogwash. SB is SB and that's it and they have no business trying to harrass you into paying them something they aren't entitled to.

 

Keep that letter safe but continue with your complaints to TS etc and give 'em a parting kick in the pants.

 

I second that line of thought!! :D

 

Well Done - it's nice to see Cabots get a kicking again :lol: :lol:

 

When will they learn??????????

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...