Cabot financila (Vanquis CC) court summons is it too late to use CCA 1974?

[diddydicky]

the worst that the judgement would have been would have given you 28 days to pay

 

if you have the letters from them in the interim asking you to make offers (you SHOULD have made offers to the court not to them) in an effort to hoodwink you whilst they applied for a charging order then you can easily get this set aside

 

although it doesnt explain why you received nothing from the court with respect to the charging order hearing

[hunni2006]

still haven't received anything from the court

[caro]

Why in the world didn't the court deal with payment, taking into account any other debts, your income and expenditure?

 

This seems very remiss and unreasonable to add to your costs by not dealing with it at the time. Not sure if it may be seen as vexatious.

 

Would Crutchley v Go Debt still be helpful to hunni PT? Is it in the public domain and something that she could use to continue the fight?

[Ganymede]

You could apply to court on an N244 for a re-determination of the judgment dated XX/XX/XXX under CPR 14.13 and state this is box 3.

 

Do this within 14 days of receiving the judgment and it is free, otherwise you may have to pay at least £40.00

 

 

Have a look at the links below on Charging Orders and what grounds you may oppose them -

 

Insolvency Helpline

 

National Debtline

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/203298-guide-charging-orders-orders.html

 

 

 

CPR 14.13 is only for when the court has set an instalment rate without a hearing and the Defendant wants it reduced/Claimant wants it increased, it will not help here as there is an ICO in place...

[hunni2006]

beat them at the hearing. interrim charge order removed no costs.

[hunni2006]

quick update.

had my day in court. gloves off this time, no more nerves, no more being bullied by the big guy.

NO charging order, Interrim charge order removed. no costs.

[citizenB]

Excellent news. Please update fully when you get the time

[underdog13]

Wonderful news, Hunni. Congratulations and kudos to you for not being intimidated:-)

[AndyOrch]

Excellent news Hunni delighted for you.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[Hadituptohere]

Great news Hunni, really pleased for ya

 

Hadituptohere

[Rhia]

Hunni this is fantastic news. Let us know the full nitty gritty when you get a minute. This really serves them right. Furthermore I would put in a very strong complaint about Cabot Financial (Europe) Ltd who use the name Morgans but they are the solicitor. Complain to the Solicitor's Regulation Authority about Cabot/Morgan and name Piers Morgan and Cabot director Glenn Crawford is who a qualified solicitor and a member. You could also complain to the Bar Council about Willem Wellinghof their inhouse (non practising) barrister too.

 

Just nipped back to add - Wasted Costs. Have you slapped in an order for your Wasted Costs?

 

I had momentarily forgotten the Cabot director's name and did a quick Google. It came up with the Cabot Funeral Home in Pasadena California - and that's probably the best place for this shower.

Edited September 3, 2010 by Rhia
Wasted costs info

[Brassed off]

Hi Hunni

 

Just read your thread and I'm inspired. Well done you, absolutely fantastic news

[Ganymede]

beat them at the hearing. interrim charge order removed no costs.

 

 

Well done!

 

What happened?

[caro]

WooHoo Hunni. Well done girl!!

[hunni2006]

Sorry it's taken so long to get back, no computer for a while!

At the hearing the rep for Cabot withdrew the application in light of the points made in my defence, namely that they were being sneaky by applying for an order whilst at the same time giving me a 14 day time limit to come up with repayment offer (which they had accepted) but they went for the order anyway. Judge told them....I should think so too and congratulated me on a "marvelous defence of my propery!" lol I enjoyed that bit!

I asked at the hearing about the removal of the interrim charge order, and was told that I didn't have to do anything and it would be removed.

surprise surprise.... it hasn't, and according to the Land registry there ahs been no communication from Morgans to ask for it's removal. I can apply myself, but would have to wait whilst the Land registry then get in touch with Morgans to confirm! More wasted time.

Wasted costs? never thought of that.... I'm actually snowed under atm trying to fight Cabot for my husband now.... it seems they have just bought up his debts..... they seem determined to get my house one way or another.

[Hadituptohere]

Keep at them hunni, at least you know that they arent unbeatable, sorry I cant help/offer any advise re the charge order x

 

Hadituptohere

[alangee]

Hunni

 

Send a copy of the judgement to Land Registry and they will remove Cabots name.

 

Alan

[AndyOrch]

It really is the Solicitors Duty to request removal

To remove the charge you should

• The y Should send your file to the Solicitor’s Office (Tax Enforcement & Insolvency Support Team, 1st Floor, South West Wing, Bush House, The Strand, London WC2B 4RD) with a memo giving
  

• 
  
  • the reason for the request ( ie Dismissed)
    
  • in payment cases, the date and amount of payment.
    

The Solicitor will return the file to their Sols with confirmation that the registration has been lifted

 

 

Regards

 

Andy

[Rhia]

I was wondering what happened Hunni. Great stuff. Good advice re LR entry. If they don't comply send Judgement as advised to LR and then complain to the Solicitors Regulation Authority about Cabot (it's Cabot registered as the solicitor not Morgans) and their dirty tricks. Personally I'd complain about them anyway for trying that stunt in court.

 

Good work that Judge.

 

Let's help with your husband's too if we can.

[citizenB]

That is good news, Hunni. How do you want me to amend your title to reflect the outcome. ** Successful outcome** ?

[hunni2006]

well I wouldn't call it a success, I still lost the original case.... but have not given up trying to find an inexpensive way of having another go at that, will let you know if I come up with anything.! lol

 

One thing to note.... In my case at the hearing and in their evidence, Cabot claim not to be the creditor... they claim to have all the rights but none of the duties. I tried to argue if that was the case then they had no right of action without being joined by the original lender but didn't get anywhere with the Judge.

In one of my oh's cases, they have got the agreement & it's all ok, however the debt includes PPi and charges which account for more than half the balance, I've written to them stating that we would be happy to make arrangements to pay but first they need to get the balance correct and provide proof that they own the debt, and in what capacity, i.e. are they now the creditor....

well, we've written 3 times now disputing the balance and asking the same questions.... surprisingly enough they will not answer the question about being the creditor,

and as for the PPi & charges, they just keep telling us to go back to the OC. My argument is... if they bought the debt it is their responsibility to ensure that they are collecting the right amount, and as they now own it, it's up to them to investigate and correct the figures, still waiting for a response to that one.

In the second case (which they bought at the same time as my debt) I had done a CCa req last year & put the account in dispute. didn't hear a thing more until yesterday when they sent a set of statements, a dodgy letter that they say came from the OC (yeah right!) saying the account was sold to Cabot ( not cabot financial uk or Europe, just cabot) and a badly copied set of T&C along with a statement showing the interest they had added since buying the account.... they have continued adding interest even when the account was in dispute.

They now claim to have fulfilled their obligations under CCA and are demanding payment on that one. am writing back to say T&C does not make executeable agreement & account still in dispute, but have a sneaky feeling they are going to try & litigate that one.

[alangee]

PT once replied to a thread, suggesting that a case - I believe in Manchester - had "filleted Cabots donkey" (I pretty sure Paul put it) as far as their definition of a creditor. I cannot think of the case at the moment, but does anybody remember what it was, and if there is a copy of it available?

 

Alan

[pt2537]

Crutchley v Go debt

 

and also Goode CCLAP and Lloyd and Guest sets out the state of affairs clearly

[hunni2006]

If a DCA buys up your debt from a credit card company but claims NOT to be a creditor but a debt purchaser, and then issues legal proceedings, are they not obliged to be joined in proceedings by the OC?

 

I was under the impression (maybe wrongly) that only the creditor can issue proceedings to recover the debt.

 

clarification would be good before I go for the throats!!

[spamheed]

creditor as defined in the Consumer Credit Act s169 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;

 

only the creditor may bring a court action, if they are not the creditor, then yes, they would need to be joined by the creditor