Dear Cabot

[Pinky69]

I know a few of you have been having a hard time with Cabot recently so I thought I would cheer you all up with a letter I wrote to them today.

 

In their letter they say I am misinformed, delaying repayment and they will put the account on hold for 7 days for me to contact them. If I don't pay, they will pass it to external agencies.

 

Dear Crapbot,

 

 

I am in receipt of your letter of 3 November 2009.

 

I’m afraid that the only one misinformed about my dispute with Cabot is you and you can pin the application form up in the cludgy for 7 days for all I care. Not only is there no agreement for this alleged account but it was rescinded at the point of sale to Cabot, a concept you clearly don’t understand. Cabot is not above the law, even though they think they are. I think you should refer it to Ken’s fancy lawyers and they will explain what rescission is to you. I’d be more than happy for Cabot to take me to court and after 1 December 2009 no consumer credit cases can be raised in court in Scotland without lodging the original agreement. As you don't have an agreement never mind the original, you had better be quick. I am not “delaying” payment on this rescinded account – I am never going to pay you a penny on this rescinded agreement so you are wasting Cabot’s time and money pursuing it, nor do I have any liability to Cabot of any kind whatsoever. They bought a job lot of lemons, which is what they do as a speciality, and forgot to check whether their purchases had any legitimacy of any kind. Cabot appealing to the morality of paying a non-existent debt is hilarious in its hypocrisy. As for passing it to external agencies, how you waste Cabot’s money is up to you. They have already taken a £6 million hit and it seems are intent in building up to the next one. I shall simply send any agency a copy of this letter and tell them to get lost.

 

Every time you pass this rescinded agreement to an external agency, I am going to make a complaint about Cabot and the agency to the Information Commissioner and the OFT because neither Cabot nor any other agency has any legitimate right to process my personal data. Keep doing it and I will take Cabot to court and sue them for processing my personal data without my permission and will include a claim for vexatious harassment and damages for stress under Section 13 of the Data Protection Act. I have one case against Cabot being prepared and it is up to you whether another one is lined up for legal proceedings. The worm has turned, consumers now know their rights under consumer law and Cabot is so far stuck in their flawed business model that they haven’t even noticed. Cabot can either go away or end up paying me substantial damages. At this rate Ken’s policy of pursuing everything the moths have been nibbling away at in the cupboard in the aftermath of the loss is going to bring Cabot to the end it more than deserves.

 

You have been warned. If there is anything about this letter you don’t understand, I suggest you take legal advice.

[hungrybear]

now that's my kind of letter, good one pinky. I sent similar to robinsons with big bold red at the top 'Either take me to court or stop harassing me'.

 

After a while you get kinda fed up of pussy footing around with them.

[PGH7447]

go go pinky:D

[submissiveguy]

Great letter, it will pin they backside to the wall lol

[Huff&Puff]

Excellent letter :) Unfortunately "rescinded" is an extra long word, and doesn't seem to be in Janet and John, so they may have difficulty in understanding

[militantconsumer]

What is this about Consumer Credit cases not being raised without the original agreement? Is this likely to happen in England as well?

[babybear39]

Subscribing with great interest...

 

Great letter btw Pinky

[IdaInFife]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dealing-debt-scotland/223540-credit-agreements-scotland-1st.html

 

not any word about down there yet.

 

 

no response yet Pinky ?

[exasperated]

subbing

[Pinky69]

Too early yet Ida and I don't expect a response any time soon. This is another one I sent to the ICO on a different Cabot case:

 

 

Please find enclosed the latest letter I have received from Cabot as an addendum to my complaint to the ICO against Cabot for entering defaults on my credit reference reports in connection with a credit card account in the name of (bank) which Cabot (King’s Hill No 1) bought from (bank).

 

 

Cabot state that they continued to report a previous default entered by the bank on 15 August 2002. The entry by Cabot was made on 16 September 2003 and expired on 16 September 2009, so the idea that their entry was simply a continuation of a previous entry is nonsense. I am going to have a field day in court with all this duplicity. Had this been a continuation of a previous bank entry, the entry would have expired on 15 August 2008. A default for the same alleged debt cannot be entered on credit records twice and it looks as if this is what Cabot have done. They can explain exactly what they did do to the local Sheriff. I have asked Equifax to provide details of any entry by the bank. Cabot’s assumption that people are so stupid they will just accept their concocted explanations is grossly insulting. I am afraid Ken Maynard’s new lawyers cannot get them through the absolute mess they have landed themselves in with this and they continue to make it worse for themselves with every letter.

 

Cabot bought the rescinded account (sold to them by bank without prior issue of a Default Notice) on 28 October 2002, so they waited almost a year before making the default entries, in breach of the ICO’s guidelines on default entry. Cabot’s entry was unlawful as it pertained to a rescinded account which never had an agreement and they did not at any time have my permission to process my personal data. They also take the very nonchalant attitude that the bank entry would have expired by now so won’t affect future credit applications. They make no response about their own later entry which only expired on 16 September 2009 and caused considerable damage, evidence of which will be produced in court. Their cavalier attitude to what is a very serious matter in an attempt to get themselves off the hook for breaches of law and the ICO’s and OFT’s guidelines is astounding but not surprising.

 

Cabot states that a Notice of Assignment was sent at the time of their purchase. I will be putting them to strict proof of postage on the alleged Notice. They must by law have retained proof as the records must be up to date until 6 years after the account is deemed closed or they are in breach of Section 9 of the Money Laundering Regulations. A Notice of Assignment must be sent by Recorded Delivery as required by the Law of Property Act 1925 S136. So if a Notice of Assignment was sent the proof of postage will be on file. I didn’t receive one and they know themselves that none was sent – more bluff. I’ll be quite happy to swear an affadavit in court to that effect.

 

Cabot makes no comment on the statements showing that they received payments from the bank after the rescinded account was sold to them – simply that they sent me statements. They received these payments unlawfully as they knew they should not have been receiving payments from thre bank as the bank no longer owned the rescinded account. I did not acknowledge any debt to Cabot – I didn’t even know they had bought the alleged account in 2002 until they told me in a letter dated 27 May 2009. I was under the mistaken impression that it had been assigned to them after I asked the bank for a copy of the agreement in 2008. When I saw the entry on my credit reference reports in April 2009, I hadn’t a clue what it was for.

 

 

(Note to Caggers - bank continued to take money fromm CCCS after I left the programme - theft - and passed it on to Cabot. I have asked the bank for my money back or I will take them to court too!).

 

 

I have not acknowledged any debt to Cabot and made no payment to them of any kind in relation to this account – everything they have received has been from the bank. So under Scots Law, the Prescriptions and Limitations Act 1973, the rescinded account ceased to exist on 28 October 2007. Cabot are under some illusion the alleged debt still exists. They do not have the authority to write it off – the law wrote it off for them in 2007, 5 years after they bought the rescinded agreement from the bank.

 

There is no agreement for this rescinded account and Cabot lied to Equifax that I had received a copy of an “agreement (application form).” No such document exists and they have confirmed that to me in their letters. There is no statement of transactions, only of payments taken unlawfully by the from CCCS and passed unlawfully to Cabot. There are no Terms and Conditions and Cabot did not attempt to take court action for enforcement, all of which are laid down in the ICO’s guidance on investigation.

 

 

 

(Caggers - there is already a complaint about all this with the ICO).

 

 

 

Cabot will have a difficult job countersuing me for payment on a rescinded account which has no agreement, no proof of transactions, no Terms and Conditions and which no longer exists. Bluff and more bluff. I think the saying is – when you are in a hole stop digging. They bluff their way through everything and they are not very good at it. It took them weeks to come up with the bilge they sent in reply but they should know by now that bluff and empty threats do not affect me in the slightest. I don’t know why they bother.

 

I have issued Cabot with a Letter Before Action and will be lodging court proceedings shortly.

 

Cc Cabot - see you in court.

[hungrybear]

bravo pinky for a very perky post!!!

 

You would think by now that the DCA's would have cottoned on to this internet thing wouldn't you? Why do they all seem to think that people will continue to swallow the bilge when its so easy to slap a few words in google and get the lowdown?

 

As an example stick the phrase 'cabot cca' into google - guess which site comes at number one - CAG and the rest of the first page is other consumer forums.

 

If they all carry on like this they'll self regulate themselves into a clear understanding of the insolvency act (PLEEEEEASE).

[babybear39]

In our dreams maybe HB lol...

[pompeyfaith]

militantconsumer,

 

I doubt it as this Government does not have the balls that scotland has.

 

PF

[angry cat]

It only applies in Bonnie Scotland!

[harrassed senior]

Great thread - just a silly thought - Bank of Scotland and its' associated buddies - governed by English or Scottish law?, or depends where you live?

[hungrybear]

Great thread - just a silly thought - Bank of Scotland and its' associated buddies - governed by English or Scottish law?, or depends where you live?

 

 

I was going to answer depends on where you live, which is true because they have companies and registered offices in belfast, london and edinburgh. BUT does anyone know if it's where you live now or where you lived when you signed the agr... I mean accrued the alleged debt?

 

for eg, my wife has alleged debts that are from accounts she set up in Scotland. Not that it really matters but would english or scottish law apply? bearing in mind that limitations in scotland wipes the debt totally.

[Pinky69]

The law that pertains is the law in the jurisdiction where the litigant/defender currently lives. Scots Law cannot be applied in England.

[the_shadow]

The law that pertains is the law in the jurisdiction where the litigant/defender currently lives. Scots Law cannot be applied in England.

 

Hence we all need to move north of the border :-D

 

S.

[babybear39]

Rightio lads and lassies 'tis north of the border we go (I'm only coming as a supporter as I got rid of my alleged debts)

[militantconsumer]

Hence we all need to move north of the border :-D

 

S.

 

Or have an address there..... (hey, that gives me an idea for a new business!)

[IdaInFife]

i have a few spare rooms £100 per week

[PriorityOne]

I've loved reading this so far Pinky...

 

Power to you... I'll be following with interest and also with any support I can give you. I'm currently dealing with these morons myself. They're on their 2nd complaint and are now refusing to talk to me... lol!

 

[mysticpols06]

subbing

[beds_male]

subbing

[PriorityOne]

Any update on these morons Pinky?