Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • jk2054 - I haven't started a claim with OIC or MIB yet, due to being unable to obtain the name of the other driver.  BankFodder cheers for that, I'll go back to them with this info & update on here when I've had a response
    • Andy thanks for your reply. No i am now being evicted from the house i moved into after that previous post. The letting agent lied to me when they said the landlord would not be selling the house. SHe did not mention that the landlord tried to sell the house last year, i was not told this, 4 months into the tenancy i got the eviction notice. Its obvious they lied to me and used me to fill in the gap between their attempts to sell the house. I have filled in the defence form as it was easy to follow the old one from my previous post. I will post it later on in the hope someone can give it the once over. It has to be in by the end of this month may 31st.  
    • It's a GR Yaris - Finance is with Alphera, who are part of BMW I believe. I'm sure the unit is very expensive to repair, I have even told them I would be happy with a refurbished/reconditioned unit, in trying to be reasonable as well.
    • Without seeing this envelope, document and sticker it is impossible to advise properly. However, just going on what you have told us, there are two ways you can deal with this: !. The easy way. This has the lowest risk but the guarantee of a penalty for speeding.  You can respond to the SJPN by pleading “Not Guilty” to both charges. In the “Reasons for pleading Not Guilty” box you can explain that you responded to the request for driver’s details but it was recently returned to you, seemingly not actioned. However, you are willing to plead guilty to the speeding charge providing, and only providing, the “Fail to Provide Driver's Details" (FtP) charge is dropped. You could also ask the court to consider sentencing you at the fixed penalty level (£100 and 3 points) as this prosecution seems to be the result of an administrative problem outside your control. 2. The not so easy way with higher risk. This could see you convicted of the FtP charge but has the possibility that you escape with no penalty whatsoever. You can do the same – plead not guilty to both charges. If you go down this route the speeding charge cannot succeed as they have no evidence you were driving. This comes from your response to the request for driver’s details which the police say they have not got. You can mention in the “Reasons” box that you returned the request for driver’s details as required. You will then face a trial for the FtP charge and you can produced your response together with the envelope and sticker showing it had been returned to you. The risk with this is that if your defence fails you will be fined a week and a half’s net income, pay a “Victim Surcharge” of 40% of the fine, pay prosecution costs of around £650 and have six points together with an endorsement code (MS90) which will see your insurance premiums rocket.
  • 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's Licence


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4989 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

Whilst trying to find out who owned Cabot in 2002, I checked the OFT website. Their licence expired in October 2009 and hasn't yet been renewed. Unfortunately they can continue on their expired licence until the OFT processes their application. Still, it is not automatic, as it seems to have been before, and the OFT could hardly ignore the complaints about them. So now seems as good a time as any to complain about Cabot. The complaints are now counting, albeit the OFT are slow on the uptake. Ruthbridge's licence also hasn't been renewed yet and theirs expired 11 months ago:rolleyes: Keep those complaints rolling in CAGGERS!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 272
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

To be honest I find this amazing, would I be allowed to continue driving my car without a Road Fund Licence for 11 months, I think not.

 

In future when dealing with either of the above it might be a suitable reply to remind them that until they have a current licence I will not deal with them!

 

Open and shut as far as I am concerned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the new tactic to be employed by CAGgers and 'alleged' debtors should be that if the DCA's CCL isn't current, no correspondence will be entered into?

 

Defence in court being that their licence has expired and should they not be able to renew it then any payment to them would be null and void as they have no right or licence to collect monies from a third party...??

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Last complaint response I got from OFT about Cabot, thanked me for the helpful info as they continue to monitor this traders fitness to have a licence. Couldn't quite make up my mind what that meant, if anything, to be honest.:-?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I received exactly the same letter. It's different from their usual response - sign here so we can use the info you gave us if need be. I do think Cabot are being monitored by them in the light of complaints and it doesn't take 7 months to issue a licence. Cabot only submitted their application a month before the licence expired so they obviously weren't expecting any delays. Bet they got a shock that they didn't get it automatically as before. They breach the guidelines all the time and are such liars that they clearly aren't fit to have a licence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is law (CCA 1974) that they must have a licence and I've just checked the OFT website. It states that their interpretation of the law is theirs alone and only a court could make a definitive decision. I am increasingly to the view that in spite of the OFT allowing them to continue trading after their licence has expired, that may not be the view held if anyone tested it in court. I think the OFT are wrong in this and that trading should be suspended whilst the OFT sit on the fence about renewing a licence. I cannot drive whilst I await a decision by DVLA to issue me with a licence or watch TV without one. What is the point of licences if you can carry on without one after it expires if the law requires that you have one?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it's quite absurd. Members of the public would never be given this amount of leeway by the state. They should set a period of time before the licence is due for renewal for applications to be received. If they don't sufficient information from the applicant to renew the licence by the time it expires then it should expire.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am of the view that the Consumer Credit Licencing system needs to be overhauled where debt collection is concerned. Amongst the reforms I think are needed are these:

 

- introduce a zero tolerance policy in relation to compliance, with a system that results in suspension and fines where a complaint is proved, with 'three strikes and your out' as the ultimate sanction

- make directors personally liable for breaches of compliance, with a system banning them from involvement in any licenceable activity for 3 years where a company loses its licence, as well as personal fines. This will prevent phoenix companies.

- make compliance training for DCA staff compulsory

- OFT to work more closely with the SRA to ensure 'name for hire' solicitors are compliant

- ensure TS investigate complaints properly

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention being allowed to continue normal day to day business when unlicenced. Licence pending is not acceptable either they are licenced or they are not, same as almost every other licenced trade - imagine being able to sell alchohol whilst 'waiting' for your 'pending' licence, the police and authorities would not stand for it, and neither should we who are being threaten and chased by an 'unlicenced' company!!

 

Climbs off soapbox

Link to post
Share on other sites

from the oft website

 

The Act includes where credit is arranged to finance the purchase of goods or services. Licensing arrangements may also be required by debt collectors, debt advisors and businesses that offer goods for hire or leasing. Trading without a licensing arrangement is a criminal offence and can result in a fine and/or imprisonment.

 

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

 

An agreement for the services of a credit broker, debt collector, debt adjuster, debt counsellor, debt administrator, credit reference agency or provider of credit information services cannot be enforced if the agreement was entered into when the business was unlicensed.

--------

So does this mean that if you have arranged a debt payment plan with an unlicensed debt collector, and you default they cant do anything??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting!

Anyone got crapbot on their case? Willing to test a new method?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is why everyone believes the OFT are wrong. Maybe it is time for CAGERS to have nothing to do with either Cabot or Ruthbridge given that their licences have expired and new licences are "pending." What makes the OFT think they have the right to break the law in favour of DCAs??????

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting!

Anyone got crapbot on their case? Willing to test a new method?

 

I have on 2 cases, neither of which I am paying. I might just slip this into the next letter that I write to them. They'll be getting heavy soon on a big debt that they bought from Cahoot which was default by Cahoot with no DN ever being issued.

 

I'll pop back here when I get my next letter from Cabot.

 

Regards.

 

Fred

Edited by Fred Bassett

Before you criticise another man you should first walk a mile in his shoes. Then, when you criticise him, you'll be a mile away and he won't have any shoes on.

 

Don't get me confused with somebody knowledgeable by all those green blobs. I got most of them by making people laugh.

 

I am not European, I am English.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tried the your are not licensed ploy with Ruthbrige last year and threatened to go to the financial press about it then Mr. Emmauel Amissah wrote he had no idea why I had been contacted as they had no record of ever having been asked to so so.

no contact for over a year!

Edited by Brigadier 1JCS
sticky fingers
Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know what date in October 2009 their licence expired?

 

Mrs Pookey had an alleged account bought by them in mid October and they have recently issued a claim, their POC's are dire. We have put in an embarrassed defence but I am quite keen to write to the Court to point out they are operating without a licence. I suppose even if they had one the day they 'bought' the account they certainly didn't when they issued the claim.

 

Otherwise it may be a misuse of Court time if they push for enforcement only to find they don't get a new licence:D.

 

If they are allowed to get away with this can I get away with not paying to renew my passport to go abroad, I still have my old one!

 

Pookey

I'm in the DCA kicking business ..........and business is good!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to our lack of interest in playing letter ping pong, thy have just threatened legal action....... maybe a letter asking them what their legal grounds are for trying to act as a credit agency when they do not have a licence may be due.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HeftyHippo

The situation should be clarified with the OFT.

 

Are cabot being allowed to trade by the OFT whilst the OFT do something (investigate, monitor etc)? If so there should be a formal procedure to denote such an arrangement (which could be understandable/reasonable in some circumstances).

 

Anything other than a formal procedure for allowing a business to trade whilst investigations are being performed would be open to abuse - just imagine a business is found to be a bit dodgy, but they bribe someone in the OFT to turn a blind eye to their failings and not reject their licence application whilst they take many months to sort themselves out. Meanwhile, most of the OFT and the public are unaware of whats going on.

 

There should be no reason why they are able to trade with an 'informal' licence or permission. If they're not fit, they're either closed down or allowed to trade whilst enforcement activities are underway, in the same way a food outlet with hygiene problems is given advice on what they need to do, but also a deadline to do it, after which they are prosecuted and/or closed.

 

Any period of grace should be a matter of weeks or a couple of months at most, not 9 months like this. As already said, when your licence expires, or car tax, so does your permission to use that facility.

 

Are there any cabot victims volunteering to get the official explanation from the OFT, after which maybe we could all make a noise about it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pity I wasn't aware of this when they unsucessfully tried to make my bankrupt recently, it would have been good to have drawn that to the judges attention, something else he could have ripped them apart over!!!:D

L/Woods B/Card/Cabot - Unenforceable CCA, SD Issued *WON+COSTS*

Capital One/Cabot - No CCA account irrecoverable.

Citi/DLC Hillesden - No CCA account irrecoverable

MBNA/Aegis - Unenforceable CCA

B/Card/HFO - Unenforceable CCA

Fashion World - No CCA account irrecoverable

TRUECALL IS A GODSEND!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...