Cabot's Licence

[DonkeyB]

You can look up licences here.

 

Public Register

 

Just hit the "CCA search" link on the right.

 

In the search window, enter "Cabot *" in the "Organisation Name" window and hit "search", and you'll get all licences related to them.

 

Licence Number:

0472690

Licence Status:

Current

Current Applicant / Licensee:

Business Name Company Registration Number

Cabot Financial (UK) Limited 3757424

Categories:

Consumer credit

Credit brokerage

Debt administration

Debt collecting

Provision of debt-adjusting on a commercial basis

Right To Canvass Off Trade Premises:

Yes

Trading Name(s) (Historic):

KH (No.1)

Cabot Financial (UK) Limited

Cabot Financial (uk) Limited

Issued Date:

07-Aug-1999

Expiry Date:

07-Sep-2009

Legal Formation:

Body Corporate (incorporated inside UK)

Current Individuals that run the organisation:

Name Position

Glen Paul Crawford OFFICER

John David Randall

Mr Kenneth William Maynard OFFICER

Historic Individuals that run the organisation:

Name Position

Angela Jane Church OFFICER

Richard Terrell Langstaff OFFICER

Nature of Business:

Other

Current Address(es):

Address Type Address

Correspondence 1, Kings Hill Avenue, Kings Hill, West Malling, Kent, ME19 4UA

Principal Place Of Business 1, Kings Hill Avenue, Kings Hill, West Malling, Kent, ME19 4UA, United Kingdom

Registered Office 1, Kings Hill Avenue, Kings Hill, West Malling, Kent, ME19 4UA, United Kingdom

Historic Address(es):

Address Type Address

Correspondence 10, Kings Hill Avenue, Kings Hill, West Malling, Kent, ME19 4LT

Principal Place Of Business 10, Kings Hill Avenue, Kings Hill, West Malling, Kent, ME19 4LT

Principal Place Of Business Borodin House, 6, Beaconsfield Court, Garforth, LEEDS, LS25 1QH, United Kingdom

Registered Office 10, Kings Hill Avenue, Kings Hill, West Malling, Kent, ME19 4LT

Registered Office Borodin House, 6, Beaconsfield Court, Garforth, LEEDS, LS25 1QH, United Kingdom

 

 

If you look under the "history" button, at event details, it shows the renewal as "pending".

 

This is all publicly available information. I believe they are allowed to continue to trade under an old licence until a licence is revoked, with the permission of the OFT.

 

As an aside, HFO Services' licence also expired in Sep 2009 and is still 'pending'. How the hell do they get away with it? What is the OFT up to? Maybe the boss is too busy counting his salary...

[Guest HeftyHippo]

If as yu say Donkey, they are allowed to trade with the permission of the OFT, there should be a proper criteria defining the circumstances of such permission - when it is given, how long it lasts etc, otherwise, a crooked DCA could persuade an OFT official to allow them to trade for some considerable time until they get their house in order ie, the licence situation would be worthless and corrupt

 

It would be a good idea for some caggers affected to challenge the OFT on the reasons why these companies have been allowed to continue to trade, and how long it will be before a decision is made. This is probably a situation the OFT would dearly like to keep quiet.

 

A more cynical person might be persuaded by the conspiracy theory that the test case last year was deliberately screwed up by the OFT because they are on the books of the credit companies, and allowing crooked and unfit DCAs to trade without a licence is just another element of that corruption and unfitness for purpose

[Seminole]

Might be worth someone asking the Govan Law Centre or a friendly trading standards officer for a view??

[Pinky69]

As I stated previously, they may have the permission of the OFT but the OFT themselves state that is their interpretation of the law and wouldn't necessarily be the view of a court. In any case, what is all this about no decision on a licence after 9 months? What is the delay about? Are the OFT unable to make up their minds? If it takes that long to decide, should a new licence be issued at all??? They are either fit to have a licence or they aren't. That seems to me to be a decision that they should be able to make fairly quickly and if there are problems with non compliance that is holding that decision up then they shouldn't have a licence at all.

[Seminole]

All this begs the question of whether a company in such a legally ambiguous position should be processing personal data. Anyone currently dealing with Cabot fancy making a complaint to the Information Commissioner?

[Housed]

I'm dealing with Cabot at moment, started a new thread this morning.

 

What do I need to do to make a complaint?

[robcag]

It would be nice if it was necessary for the OFT to publish some sort of official info regarding this type of occurrence. IMO there should definitely be restrictions placed on Crapbot with them only being permitted to carry on with a minimal (if any!) number of operations (such as cleaning the toilets), definitely not possibly 'life-changing' activities such as court cases etc.

 

Personally I have two ongoing battles with Crapbot, one mine, one in my parteners name. Mine is an ex-Goldfish account, hers is a CrapOne.

 

Regarding my Goldfish account, I'm of the opinion that Crapbot have definitely lost the plot! They've issued a court claim against me, yet they haven't fulfilled my s78 CCA1974 request, and have stated in two separate letters that they have been unable to obtain an agreement!

 

Just to put the icing on the cake, when they sent the second of the aforementioned letters they enclosed a single monthly statement saying this proved the account existed! Nonsense anyway, but would you believe ..... the statement was for a completely unrelated HFC account!

 

What we have to put up with from these morons beggars belief

 

Cheers

Rob

Edited June 2, 2010 by robcag
Made an incorrect reference!

[Seminole]

Others may well have a different opinion on this but I would start by asking Cabot what right they have to process your personal data when their Consumer Credit Licence has expired. If they replied they would argue that the OFT says that they can carry on trading during the renewal process.

 

I would then write to the ICO pointing out the legally ambiguous (by the OFT's own admission) position of such licence holders. Given that the purpose of a debt collector is to collect debt and they can't do this without a licence, then it follows that if they're not legally licenced they should stop processing your data.

 

The fact is that the OFT will do nothing about this in response to consumer complaints. It's unlikely that they would do anything in response to an ICO enquiry but I've always liked the idea of tying up the state by getting it to investigate itself.

[Guest HeftyHippo]

That seems to me to be a decision that they should be able to make fairly quickly and if there are problems with non compliance that is holding that decision up then they shouldn't have a licence at all.

 

Thats my point Pinky- are the OFT simply hanging on until Cabot sort themselves out and get them selves 'fit' to hold a licence? Is it the old boys network at play? Is it a case of there being too many problems for the licence to be renewed so the OFT are letting cabot sort the problems out so they can renew the licnence?

[Guest HeftyHippo]

I'm dealing with Cabot at moment, started a new thread this morning.

 

What do I need to do to make a complaint?

 

Anyone got any ideas to get this ball rolling? Maybe draft a letter on here to send to the OFT asking them on what legal opinion their decision is based, and for how long they intend to allow a company to continue without a licence?

 

I forsee that their decision is based on their own inability to investigate the complaints in time to allow cabot's licence to be renewed at the time of expiry. If they didn't allow cabot to continue to trade, cabot may have a case for damages for lost business against the OFT.

 

That isn't justification for allowing a company with complaints against it to continue to trade indefinitely, but it is justification for reviewing the activities of the OFT and changing how it works, and who runs it.

[Angel104]

Following the recent thread about cabots licence I e mailed the OFT and this is their reply:

In regards to your concerns about Cabot Financial (UK) Limited’s credit licence status, the Consumer Credit Register entry for Cabot Financial (UK) Limited (licence number 472690) shows its licence status to be ‘current’ – which is correct. We can confirm that Cabot Financial (UK) Limited’s licence did not expire in 7 September 2009. Cabot Financial (UK) Limited submitted a valid application to renew its consumer credit licence before the licence was due to expire (see the ‘History’ section on the Public Register entry for Cabot Financial (UK) Limited) and in accordance with section 29 of the Consumer Credit Act, the licence continues in force until the OFT decision on its application. Due to legal constraints, the OFT is unable to disclose any further information relating to licence applications above and beyond that which is available on the CCR.

[Hadituptohere]

Wow.. I have a possible court date coming up early July (thats if cabot reply to the two court orders), Ill gladly draw this issue to the DJ attention and get his/her perspective on the matter, im sure they would love this after the hand slapping morgans have been sent about tying up courts time by not adhering to CPR

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/127059-hadituptohere-cabot-17.html

 

Hadituptohere

[Pinky69]

We know what the OFT says but they may not be legally correct and they say that that is their view and may not necessarily be the view of a court. The licence has expired and the fact they had their application in before the expiry date is irrelevant. They don't yet have their new licence and the law says they cannot operate without one, no matter what the OFT says. The last bit of their letter concerns the fact that Cabot have had a lot of complaints against them( no surprises there - it was us who sent them) and that is why it is taking a long time to process. Ruthbridge are still waiting for theirs after almost a year. If the OFT would get off the fence and take action then this farcical situation wouldn't arise. Section 29 can be challenged on the grounds that the provision was never intended to allow DCAs to go on for months without a licence.

[cerberusalert]

Two threads merged from post #36.

[Guest HeftyHippo]

I think a few letters to MPs are in order. As Pinky said above, and I said above, the fact is, their licence has not been renewed for wahtever reason, and although there may be justifciiation for some 'slack' or goodwill in the absence of quarenteed service perfrokance tsandtands from teh OFT, they shoul dnot be allowed to continue trading indefinately just because the OFT are too slow, lazy, inefficent or incomeptent to consider their licence applciation, nor should there be any room for the question of backhanders facilitaing the dealying of licence applications until cabot sort themselves out.

 

This sitauion simply assists bad companies to stay in business, and doesn't enforce acceptable standards which is what a licensing requirement is supposed to do.

 

If cabot are unfit to hold a licence they should be closed down, if the OFT are unfit to operate the lienceing system to an aceptable standard, then THEY should be closed down.

 

Perhaps a few letters to the OFT questioning their performance, and a few to MPS questioning the fitness of the OFT bearing in mind their CEO is the highest paid civil servant in the UK, might bring a change in attitude? The service standards of the OFT certainly need examining

[Martel]

Am reading this with total fascination. I have TWO Cabot hearings in the next ten days and intend to bring this info up in my Witness Statement.

 

I see that it's Cabot Financial (UK) ltd that is without a valid licence.....does anyone know the status of Cabot Financial (Europe) ltd? I am assuming that it will need to be licenced here in the UK (am trying the OFT website to search but it's v v v sleepy today).

 

Thanks!!

 

MX

[miss muppet]

Have a look at donkey's post 26, there is a link to the public register there.

[harrassed senior]

I am e-mailing WATCHDOG this weekend on this very subject, so will keep you updated.

[harrassed senior]

Done

 

Anyone else care to write to Watchdog, we may get an investigation.

[count orlok]

Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited are licensed until 2013 sorry to say as they have just started on me.

[Hadituptohere]

Dont know if this is anything to do with owt but cabot UK who has no employes bulk purchase the debts and cabot europe administer the debts

 

Hadituptohere

[cymruambyth]

That's just what I was going to post all pre litigation comes from Cabot Europe, but litigation is through Cabot UK

[vengeancedemon]

Just out of interest, FIRE the collection numpties do not appear to have a Consumer Credit Licence number. Or is this not relevant to them

(Just received a "Make us a reasonable offer" letter on a defaulted with AN Other DCA on a CCA

[Martel]

That's just what I was going to post all pre litigation comes from Cabot Europe, but litigation is through Cabot UK

 

Hi Cym,

 

It's all sort of smoke and mirrors......the POCs for my Cabot Claim are from Cabot (UK). The Assignment letter from Cabot state the Cabot Financial Group have bought your account with Egg....but all payments should be to Cabot (Europe) (and that's their postal address, too). The Egg letters of assignment state the account was sold to Cabot (UK). All the Court docs state that too, but Morgan sols, in their WS, sign off as Cabot (Europe). Deliberately designed to confuse. Or what!!

 

Grrrr....MX

[Martel]

Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited are licensed until 2013 sorry to say as they have just started on me.

 

Hiya,

 

Maybe worth another look.....did you get a letter re the assignment from the original creditor and, if so, does it state which Cabot the account was sold to? My Cabot letters don't actually state Cabot (UK) anywhere (except, stretching it, as an email address) but all the court docs are Cabot (UK).

 

Worth clarifying....

 

MX