Jump to content


Unenforceable Credit Card Agreements Morgan Solicitors acting for Cabot


ohm
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4175 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

I have registered today and was glad to see your message re Georges V Cabot.Cabot have filed a case against me as assignee of debts from Providian & Barclaycard.I requested true signed copies of agreements under CCA 1974-paid £1 fee.They sent me one from Providian-acopy of a 'Reply Card' card saying 'Please reply by 15th Dec 2000'-it has my signature and dated 29 Nov 2000.No terms & Conditions.Another separate copy headed 'Financial And Related Conditions' which may be copy from any year-no link between the two.Willing to provide (not obliged as they are assignee) Barclaycard Credit Agreement when a copy is provided by the Assignor.My cheque was returned and they have stated that.

'You will observe that section 77 and 78 CCA74 states that ''The Creditor under a regulated agreement...shall give the debtor'' cetain documents.The Claimant also submits that it is an assignee of the contractual benefits of the agreement.Accordingly Cabot Financial (UK) Ltd(''Cabot UK'') is not the Creditor for the purpose of the CCA74 as defined by Section 189 of the CCA74.

The CCA states that the Creditoris ''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'' The Claimant in this case is the Assignee of the contractual benefits of the Credit Agreement and the Judgement.The contractual liabilities and the burdens of the Credit Agreement have not been assigned.The Claimants position is that as a matter of contract law,an assignment transfer the rights or benefits but does not relieve the Assignor of duties or burdons of liabilities to the other contacting party or entitle that party to enforce such duties or burdens of liabilities against the assignne of the debt.In the House Of Lords case of Linden Gardens Trust Ltd v Lenesta Sludge Disposals Ltd (1994) 1 AC 85,Lord Brown-Wilkinson stated that ''It is trite law that it is, in any event, impossible to assign ''the contact'' as a whole,i.e.including both burden and benefit.The burden of a contract can never be assigned without the concent of the other party to the contract...''Therefore, it is submitted that the claimant is an assignee and has not been assigned the burden or the liability of the the Credit Agreement.Therefore the Claimant is not bound by Section 77 or 78 CCA74 requests.

As we the Claimant is not the Creditor for the purpose of the CCA74, we return your cheque to you.

I have filed my Defence saying that there is no valid agreement and no monies are due to Cabot.

1)The Claimant has not provided true copy of agreement fully compliant with all the regulations made under the provisions CCA 1974.Proof Required.

2)No Statement of Accounts

3)No Default Notice from Cabot

4)No Notice of Assignment etc total claim £20645.62

Allocation Questionnare to be filed by 18/7/10.

Any help/suggestions will be appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moved to Legal Forum

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ohm

 

you state that you have filed your defence, have cabot issed a claim against you? do you have have their Particulars Of Claim?

 

The CCA 1974 is quite clear on the definition of creditor and unless the Original Creditor and Cabot are the Claimant then they have no right to issue any claim.

 

Hadituptohere

I'm far from an expert, but learning all the time!!!!!

 

If i've been at all helpful please click my star.

 

Hadituptohere OH V Capital One, **WON**

Hadituptohere V Cabot, (providian/Monument/Barclaycard cc) - ** claim struck out ** due to non complaince of CPR, Wasted Costs applied for, Default Cost Certificate issued by Court, Warrant of excecution and CC Baliffs instructed...lol 😎

Hadituptohere V Cabot, (morgan stanley dean witter/barclays cc) - account in dispute, LBA sent to barclays, awaiting responce, no responce.

Hadituptohere V RBS, default removal x 2, case dismissed, judge used Balance of Probabilities against hard Evidence.

Hadituptohere OH v Santander, Santander issue claim in court, settled out of court via Tomlin, less solicitors fees and interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello

 

I think you should cross reference this thread as I posted part of your case on here and the information should interest you.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/264876-lost-against-cabot-3.html

 

I also see the application dates from 2000. When did you last pay or acknowledge the debt? that's if you do acknowledge the debt.

Edited by Rhia
Link to post
Share on other sites

...The Claimant in this case is the Assignee of the contractual benefits of the Credit Agreement and the Judgement...

What "Judgement"?

 

This implies that Barclaycard, having obtained judgement of a regulated agreement, assigned the benefit of the judgement debt to Cabot, who in turn is claiming the judgement amount as a straightforward lump sum debt.

 

Questions spring to mind:

 

  • When was Barclaycard's CCA 74 case?
  • What were the arguments?
  • Where's the judgement?
  • Is it the same amount as now claimed by Cabots?
  • Does it order payment by instalments?

If there isn't a judgement, then what are Cabot talking about?

 

Take a look at this. The bit from "Here's how" about half-way down has remarkable similarities. In particular, the last two paragraphs could be your escape route if well argued.

 

[rams thinking cap more firmly on ...]

Edited by Meldrew
typo & link repair

Oh dear, why do these things always happen to me - I don't beli...

Link to post
Share on other sites

... and another thing:

...In the House Of Lords case of Linden Gardens Trust Ltd v Lenesta Sludge Disposals Ltd (1994) 1 AC 85,Lord Brown-Wilkinson stated that ''It is trite law that it is, in any event, impossible to assign ''the contact'' as a whole,i.e.including both burden and benefit.The burden of a contract can never be assigned without the concent of the other party to the contract...''

But CCA 74 expressly requires a valid assignment to comprise "rights and duties" ("both burden and benefit" in Lord Brown-Wilkinson's words). Therefore I don't think his Lordship's remarks apply here.

Oh dear, why do these things always happen to me - I don't beli...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Smoke and screen springs to mind, this stinks of someone trying to throw contractual law in to the ring.......

 

Hadituptohere

I'm far from an expert, but learning all the time!!!!!

 

If i've been at all helpful please click my star.

 

Hadituptohere OH V Capital One, **WON**

Hadituptohere V Cabot, (providian/Monument/Barclaycard cc) - ** claim struck out ** due to non complaince of CPR, Wasted Costs applied for, Default Cost Certificate issued by Court, Warrant of excecution and CC Baliffs instructed...lol 😎

Hadituptohere V Cabot, (morgan stanley dean witter/barclays cc) - account in dispute, LBA sent to barclays, awaiting responce, no responce.

Hadituptohere V RBS, default removal x 2, case dismissed, judge used Balance of Probabilities against hard Evidence.

Hadituptohere OH v Santander, Santander issue claim in court, settled out of court via Tomlin, less solicitors fees and interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Smoke and screen springs to mind, this stinks of someone trying to throw contractual law in to the ring.......

Hey now, hadit - I hope you don't mean me...? :???:

Edited by Meldrew
gloop!

Oh dear, why do these things always happen to me - I don't beli...

Link to post
Share on other sites

No I am sure they don't.

 

There is another thread where Cabots legal people have appeared to raise dubious cases, just to confuse.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey now, hadit - I hope you don't mean me...? :???:

 

 

As if I would my friend, sorry I didnt make that clearer.. I was refering to the OP they have posted this nonsence in every thread they could put it.

 

Hadituptohere

I'm far from an expert, but learning all the time!!!!!

 

If i've been at all helpful please click my star.

 

Hadituptohere OH V Capital One, **WON**

Hadituptohere V Cabot, (providian/Monument/Barclaycard cc) - ** claim struck out ** due to non complaince of CPR, Wasted Costs applied for, Default Cost Certificate issued by Court, Warrant of excecution and CC Baliffs instructed...lol 😎

Hadituptohere V Cabot, (morgan stanley dean witter/barclays cc) - account in dispute, LBA sent to barclays, awaiting responce, no responce.

Hadituptohere V RBS, default removal x 2, case dismissed, judge used Balance of Probabilities against hard Evidence.

Hadituptohere OH v Santander, Santander issue claim in court, settled out of court via Tomlin, less solicitors fees and interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I have this theory (which you may think whacky) but I think Cabot start threads under nom de plumes with the odd real case they have won and pretend to be the Defendant. It's all aimed at undermining CAGers confidence that they can't take Cabot on and win. But, as we all know, people are taking on Cabot and Morgan and they can and do win. Carry on winning!

 

Meanwhile I do enjoy spotting their stooges...it's such great sport on a slow telly night.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have this theory (which you may think whacky) but I think Cabot start threads under nom de plumes with the odd real case they have won and pretend to be the Defendant. It's all aimed at undermining CAGers confidence that they can't take Cabot on and win. But, as we all know, people are taking on Cabot and Morgan and they can and do win. Carry on winning!

 

Meanwhile I do enjoy spotting their stooges...it's such great sport on a slow telly night.

 

Hahaha im back and I totally agree with Rhia, these have to be stooges that are trying portray that cabot are invincible....Fools

 

Hadituptohere

I'm far from an expert, but learning all the time!!!!!

 

If i've been at all helpful please click my star.

 

Hadituptohere OH V Capital One, **WON**

Hadituptohere V Cabot, (providian/Monument/Barclaycard cc) - ** claim struck out ** due to non complaince of CPR, Wasted Costs applied for, Default Cost Certificate issued by Court, Warrant of excecution and CC Baliffs instructed...lol 😎

Hadituptohere V Cabot, (morgan stanley dean witter/barclays cc) - account in dispute, LBA sent to barclays, awaiting responce, no responce.

Hadituptohere V RBS, default removal x 2, case dismissed, judge used Balance of Probabilities against hard Evidence.

Hadituptohere OH v Santander, Santander issue claim in court, settled out of court via Tomlin, less solicitors fees and interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi cym

 

yes.. thankyou for asking, almost a month in sunny Mauritius certainly has blown the cobwebs away.. just trying to get my head together after the 22 hours travelling.

 

Hadituptohere

I'm far from an expert, but learning all the time!!!!!

 

If i've been at all helpful please click my star.

 

Hadituptohere OH V Capital One, **WON**

Hadituptohere V Cabot, (providian/Monument/Barclaycard cc) - ** claim struck out ** due to non complaince of CPR, Wasted Costs applied for, Default Cost Certificate issued by Court, Warrant of excecution and CC Baliffs instructed...lol 😎

Hadituptohere V Cabot, (morgan stanley dean witter/barclays cc) - account in dispute, LBA sent to barclays, awaiting responce, no responce.

Hadituptohere V RBS, default removal x 2, case dismissed, judge used Balance of Probabilities against hard Evidence.

Hadituptohere OH v Santander, Santander issue claim in court, settled out of court via Tomlin, less solicitors fees and interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...