Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I need to get a hamster. lol
    • Just a typo change that I'd make for the last line. Maybe also add something that says "I assume you will be fully aware that you cannot rely on a clause of a contract that you do not produce."
    • Hello, Firstly, and most importantly I am sorry for your loss. I would go back to the bank with the death certificate and ask them to step in. Remind them firmly but politely that there is no limit for DD claims   Please let us know how you get on.
    • My wife is the named person to his bank account with him having Dementia being his daughter (I say named person she still is but he recently passed away and the deputyship application has now being stopped by the solicitor as it's no longer needed) We've only just got the Death Certificate so the bank will be the next step informing them. She went to the bank and explained the situation but even being his named person the bank said she didn't have the power to stop DD without any legal documents (virgin money) was the bank. She could have copies of bank statements that was about it.
    • I see you said you tried to stop the DD but it seems that didn't work. May I please ask why that didn't work? You should be asking your bank to cancel the DD and I don't see why they would have objected, hopefully you can clarify this. I agree that you should be making a claim here against your bank and ask them for a DD refund. There is no timeframes for this.
  • 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 and CCA - Morgan Stanley goldfish debt


seriously fed up
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5528 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

I sent CABOT the "in default" letter when they couldnt produce the necessary documents for a Morgan Stanley debt of mine that they had bought.

 

 

Today I got the following reply which you can find at

cabotapril1page1.jpg picture by soccerdoc - Photobucket

and cabotapril1page2.jpg picture by soccerdoc - Photobucket.

 

The most interesting bit at the end (third last paragraph) where they suggest that Section 10 of DPA doesnt apply as I signed a credit agreement - which they cant produce.

Is this strange or is it just me?

Should I respond, or just sit tight?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It frustrates me when they say they do not have an obligation to provide the credit agreement; section 189 of the CCA says differently.

 

" "creditor" means the person providing credit under a consumer credit agreement or the person to whom his rights and duties under the agreement have passed by assignment or operation of law, and in relation to a prospective consumer credit agreement, includes the prospective creditor;"

 

Anyway... there is a little known piece of information within the ICO's remit that allows them to make a ruling on DCA's reporting default information without an executed credit agreement...

 

"If the dispute has not been before a court, is the lender prepared to test their claim by seeking a CCJ or decree against the customer? If not, why not?" Data Protection Technical Guidance s.44

 

Basically if the lender is sure of their legal position regarding credit information why are they not seeking to enforce it via a CCJ? Surely this is a logical step if they want to recover their money?

 

I beleive the ICO are saying, essentially, that reporting information on someones credit worthiness is pointless unless you enforce this opinion. Otherwise the company is hiding something which, quite obviously, is a technicality within their paperwork which would render any action subject to successful defence.

 

I might also add that I would ignore their claims regarding s.10 of the DPA 1998 - the only organisation that can say whether this provision is being breached is the ICO. I would put a complaint in after receiving a final response letter from the DCA.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent CABOT the "in default" letter when they couldnt produce the necessary documents for a Morgan Stanley debt of mine that they had bought. Today I got the following reply which you can find at cabotapril1page1.jpg picture by soccerdoc - Photobucket and cabotapril1page2.jpg picture by soccerdoc - Photobucket.

The most interesting bit at the end (third last paragraph) where they suggest that Section 10 of DPA doesnt apply as I signed a credit agreement - which they cant produce. Is this strange or is it just me?

Should I respond, or just sit tight?

 

Sit tight and do not rattle their cage anymore.Personally, I would never send the "in default" letter to any DCA, it just seems an excuse for them to send the type of letter you have received and leave you more bewildered.If they have said they cannot produce the CCA, thats it and do not pay them anything until in the unlikely event,that they do produce it. Even if they do it still has to be enforcable. My request from Cabot dates back to last year and am hoping that my Goldfish has drowned!!!!:smile:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sit tight and do not rattle their cage anymore.Personally, I would never send the "in default" letter to any DCA, it just seems an excuse for them to send the type of letter you have received and leave you more bewildered.If they have said they cannot produce the CCA, thats it and do not pay them anything until in the unlikely event,that they do produce it. Even if they do it still has to be enforcable. My request from Cabot dates back to last year and am hoping that my Goldfish has drowned!!!!:smile:

It depends upon what sort of action you want to take. If you are not bothered about a default being recorded on your CF then best to save the paper and postage costs.

 

But... if you want to take action it is best to inform the company of the default so that you can show the relevant authorities that you have followed procedures and done everything you can to resolve the situation between yourselves.

 

Like I said, it's all about what you want to achieve.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...