Cabot's Licence

[angry cat]

by Rhia:

I also read another thread here last night about a court case that Cabot lost involving defamation but when I looked just now it has gone!

 

Yes, where has the thread gone?

[Pinky69]

It's currently on Page 2 - keep up with the programme cat!

[angry cat]

It's currently on Page 2 - keep up with the programme cat!

 

OOH, I only popped out for some cream:)

[Guest Mrs Hobbit]

I would be writing to the new Government and in particular Vince Cable. Maybe a line to my favourite reporter at the Guardian would not go amiss.

[ScarletPimpernel]

Firstly, we should not perhaps blame Cabot for taking advantage of the OFT's inefficiency; I suspect that many companies would exploit inadequate regulation if they had the opportunity - vide any bank in the last few years, for example.

 

As far as writing to politicians is concerned, I have some experience of making representation to Parliamentarians, and offer the following tips:

 

- always write to your own MP, not directly to Ministers or other MPs (e.g. committee members)

- the way to get your point across to a Minister is to ask your MP to raise a question with the Minister. For example, 'I would be grateful if you would ask the Business Secretary what measures he can take to ensure that the OFT regulates the debt collection industry effectively'.

- you will usually get a holding reply from your MP, followed by a copy of the Minister's reply to him with a covering letter.

- don't go into too much detail. A concise letter is best - if your MP wants more info his office will contact you.

- write your own letter. MPs and Ministers won't usually bother to reply to template letters.

- use Theyworkforyou.com to find your MP and send him or her a message. Quick, easy and free.

- don't forget to contact County Councillors about Trading Standards if you get fobbed off over DCA complaints.

[Rhia]

Pinky69 Page 2 of what? I can't see that court story on page 2 of this thread.

[angry cat]

Pinky69 Page 2 of what? I can't see that court story on page 2 of this thread.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/262804-interesting-info-cabot.html

[Pinky69]

It was there alright.:grin:

[angry cat]

It was there alright.:grin:

 

To reiterate; I only popped out to buy some cream!

[andrew1]

Now I wonder what use we can make of Cabots own 'Anna' who now works for the OFT in their special investigation team???

 

She would have been a fan of Seahorse at the time she was there and known all about the Cabot fan Club and it's following by avid Cabot staff members....maybe our Anna, who is a lovely young lady who used to be on the litigation team down at the Towers, will perhaps give the odd nod and a wink to David Blocksidge her boss as to what she should do for us and the antics we all know about which have brought cabot to where they are today?....I'll have a word

 

Amazing the network of friends we have created No harm in giving them an update on what's be going on in the last couple of years is there?

Edited June 9, 2010 by andrew1
correction..she's not in the OFT licencing section!

[Guest Mrs Hobbit]

Ah, those were the days, the staff at Cabot Towers followed the Fan Club slavishly and when we faced them in a Court Room, it was great to put names to faces. I hope Seahorse is enjoying his time bobbing along on the briny.

 

Ah yes, Anna at the OFT.

[Rhia]

Popped back to page 2 and found the link you were referring to which I am already subscribed too and PDG it is too.

 

However, that wasn't the case I was referring to. Someone (sorry just can't recall who as it was quite late when I read it) posted a story from a website which exposes financial wrongdoings and it was about a case in a north London county court in which Cabot had pursued for an uneforceable Vanquis card against someone who didn't even owe it.

 

The people sued and have been awarded damages for defamation against Cabot but the whole thing has vanished into thin air. Hope Cabot hasn't had a hissy fit and demanded its removal or something. After all a court case is a matter of public record.

[Guest Mrs Hobbit]

Would Cabot demand anything like this? I know from my own experience they don't like being beaten in Court Room. These cases are Public Domain so should not be removed.

[pmhcfc]

Popped back to page 2 and found the link you were referring to which I am already subscribed too and PDG it is too.

 

However, that wasn't the case I was referring to. Someone (sorry just can't recall who as it was quite late when I read it) posted a story from a website which exposes financial wrongdoings and it was about a case in a north London county court in which Cabot had pursued for an uneforceable Vanquis card against someone who didn't even owe it.

 

.

 

You mean me and this?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/262804-interesting-info-cabot.html

[Pinky69]

That IS the thread about the court case. The link to the story is in the first post on the thread. It had moved to page 2 when Cat asked.

Edited June 9, 2010 by Pinky69

[angry cat]

Pinky, I was indeed surprsied to find that the thread had moved on to page 2!

[Martel]

Had a GHASTLY session in court with Cabot. I'll spare you the long story behind it but I did get into the whole Cabot UK doesn't have a licence (and the whole Cabot (Europe) smoke and mirrors business with which company is issuing the claim and which one is collecting). The DJ totally shrugged off the fact they don't have a licence, as tho it was of no concern of the court whatever and didn't even bother to adjourn to find out. The DJ couldn't have cared less that the Claimant hounding me didn't have a licence. Unbelievable.

 

MX

[Guest Mrs Hobbit]

This is what Cabot count on when an LiP goes into Court, they hope you get bogged down in the minutae. Something the CFC learned early in the piece, the DJ's don't care about this, just if the agreement is enforceable. I know it is galling, but that is the way it is.

 

I have found just keep it simple and you generally walk out a winner.

[angry cat]

Had a GHASTLY session in court with Cabot. I'll spare you the long story behind it but I did get into the whole Cabot UK doesn't have a licence (and the whole Cabot (Europe) smoke and mirrors business with which company is issuing the claim and which one is collecting). The DJ totally shrugged off the fact they don't have a licence, as tho it was of no concern of the court whatever and didn't even bother to adjourn to find out. The DJ couldn't have cared less that the Claimant hounding me didn't have a licence. Unbelievable.

 

MX

 

Martel, it was not relevant to the case!

 

I agree with Mrs Hobbit, always best to keep things simple.

 

Matters relating to C*bot's CCA Licence, should be kept separate from individual's pleadings.

Edited June 9, 2010 by angry cat
error

[Martel]

Ah, not trying to be mysterious, but there were a lot of wrinkles to this case (more anon on my thread). Believe me, on the day, it couldn't HAVE been simpler. And, I can't believe that the fact the actual Claimant's licence to conduct business hasn't been renewed isn't somehow significant. Whatever!

 

Will watch your thread with interest. And, you're right. We should mobilise and COMPLAIN.

 

MX

[Rhia]

Thanks for posting that again pmfc. I was beginning to think I had imagined it. I have to say the standard of journalism in the report is dubious as I had to read and re-read to work out the meaning.

 

However, whatever its literary merits, it seems Cabot is in some significant guano. Martel - I am not surprised the DJ didn't want to know about Cabot's various guises - they rarely do.

 

The Cabot Fan Club peeled away the many layers of this particular onion a couple of years ago and you will find threads on this forum on the subject. For them to go such a long time awaiting licence renewal tells us all that something is wrong in Cabot Towers. Very wrong.

[dave354uk]

I am in court with them next month for an old alledged Morgan Stanley account, they are scraping the barrel as they only have the illegible application form as evidence.......seems strange that they are going after me with that, I wonder if they are trying to get as much in as possible incase they don't get a licence?

 

Very interesting!

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

[dave354uk]

by Rhia:

I also read another thread here last night about a court case that Cabot lost involving defamation but when I looked just now it has gone!

 

Yes, where has the thread gone?

 

The thread is not there anymore, I am currently counterclaiming with them fro defamation, I could really do with seeing that thread.

[andrew1]

Well you can always tell when things are going pear-shaped because companies do one of two things when life gets tough. They either slam down the shutters on expenditure (as happened post Gordon Broon) or they try and advertise their way out.

 

Kenny baby is this months sponsor for Credit Today magazine which will cost him a few grand to say the least and he is in there bleating on about how ethical a collector Cabot are and has been in every advert or article I've seen.

 

Couple that with his thinly veiled body language and prose which states how difficult life is these days in Debt Purchase and collections with all the well informed, misguided rogue debtors out here and it is not difficult to read between the lines things ain't what they should be.

 

He's going on the offensive to try and counter this public onslaught for him to tidy up his business practices and to be fair sadly the people he's actually targeting with all this advertising are his own kind and the people who sell him these debts. Advertising in Credit Today or any other credit journal does not reach anyone outside the industry itself such as his 'customers' and it is they who he chases which are giving him this run for his money.

 

Turn your charm offensive to those people Kenny and then you might get a little more 'assistance' from them in coming to arrangements to pay you what they owe. Chuck out those debts you should not be chasing because they are not within the confines of the law - easily identifiable by your trained staff, and then work on the quality of the debts left. Do your job right and the return will pay off.

 

We have a saying in the Fan Club - " Keep It Simple" - why don't you go back to basics and improve the quality of your base line? (Goodness, I normally charge for this kind of advice) the quality of the debt itself, the quality of the information that comes with it, the quality of the agreements with the OC, the quality of the potential litigation and for goodness sake do not take your eye off the ball up there in Rugby - the quality of what gets put into court (Northampton bulk was not your brightest move!) and get those dimwits up there to do their jobs properly and it will save you wasting vast amounts on costs chasing duff debts with duff information which have no chance of success if only you'd got the right people working the accounts.

 

You waste far too much money and time throwing too much mud at the wall hoping some of it will stick and when it doesn't, you blame the debtors for being 'won't payers' because they found sites like this which show them you have to abide by certain laws, rules and regulations. You want to live up to your 'ethical' tag? - then start by checking out how life has changed for the DCA's and get some of those staff in the Towers on a few courses in how to do their jobs properly. No point having fancy letterheads if the dross on it is not right. If you read back over the time this particular thread began back in 2007 - ask yourself what has changed since then? - what have you done to change your ways? - not a lot by the sounds of things so now it's beginning to hurt you think litigation is the way to treat it? - Desperation my friend - go back to basics and see where you have gone wrong - a bad tradesman always blames his tools or someone else. Don't blame us when it all goes wrong - look at what you are doing - we told you this years ago and we are all still here telling you the same old thing.

 

A lot of companies I worked with in years gone by would be sending out invoices which were wrong before they went in the envelope - how do you expect them to be paid? - well take a leaf out of that lesson then, and only then will you begin to turn the tide again.

 

I know it hurts to see your name in lights on places like this countering all that advertising offensive showing the world how nice you guys are in the Towers, but you have taken your eye off the ball on what is actually your core problem - the quality of debt information, the lack of initial checks on the quality of the data from the OC's and the way you finished the job via Rugby. Make sure what goes in your envelopes is right my friend..(my friend? mmm?? - don't think Kenny would class me amongst one of his friends do you guys? )

 

There, and all that for free! But then CaG is a free site for people to learn from...are you a people?

Edited June 10, 2010 by andrew1

[Newborn]

I checked and double checked that FIRE (Ltd) wasn't on the CCA public register then sent a complaint. Within hours one was there and I got a nice E-Mail saying they'd located one.

 

I think that may have been a mistake by the register holder?

 

But it runs out in Dec this year.

 

Also check out the addresses and names of officers that run the organisation. Separate from Cabot eh?

 

Licence Reg Number - 0496716

Edited June 10, 2010 by Newborn
Extra info