Cabot/Morgans going to court with copy/illegible CCA

[shaaarn]

When you go tomorrow, just tell them you have the Cabot Fan Club behind you - they are going to have to better than that to get this one passed the judge would they like to settle before going into court or wait for the slaughter?

 

" but did one more search last night and find one CRA has defaults listed in Cabots name and the original creditor?"

 

Are you saying you have 2 defaults registered for the same debt? That's a big No-No....!!

 

YES! OC default dated 22/11/7 and Cabot default dated 1/11/7 is shown on CRA. Claim was only made in Jan this year though and Cabot have sent a representation of a DN dated 23rd Dec 09. Im confused?

[shaaarn]

As Rhia and Andrew say, the double entry on the defaults is a dead give away.

 

But do bear in mind that the registering of a default with the CRAs is NOT the same as the issue of a DN!

 

OK Donkey thanks for pointing that out because I was making that link, does the fact that the OC state the account ended in 31/10/09 make a link to it being terminated though?

[shaaarn]

Hi Shaarn,

If they have not issued a DN and it is not terminated, which is what they seem to be saying, that means that the account must still be live. If this is the case, they should have been sending regular statements of account.

How prepared are you?

Very best of luck.

 

No regular statements recieved since Sept 09 when the balance appears to have been zero-ed!

[shaaarn]

Hi Shaarn,

Another thing, I read on a similar thread that the defendant gave the "agreement" to the oppo solicitor and asked him to read (a particular illegible part) of it. This should prove the point.

 

Great Idea!

[shaaarn]

If the OC has registered a default that's OK but if they assign the debt to a DCA the original default has to come off before Cabot can start to regsister it. In other words you can't have two defaults for one debt.

 

And yes pabrmu agree check if it's live or not.

 

How can I check it is live? (is this a stupid question)

[pabrmu]

Hi Shaarn,

If you have not been receiving monthly statements, then I don't think that it can be a live agreement.Someone better qualified than me will tell you the part of CCA 1974 that says this.

If it is not live, then it must have been terminated, in which case you should have received the DN and termination Notice.

Another error that they normally make is not sending the Notice of Assignment by registered/recorded delivery.

Have you acknowledged receipt of the NOA?

If not, and they do not have proof of posting, they cannot prove that they own the debt.

The law governing the correct serving of the NOA is the Law of Property Act 1925, Sect.196:

196.--

 

(1) Any notice required or authorised to be served or given by this Act shall be in writing.

 

(2) Any notice required or authorisd by this Act to be served on a lessee or mortgagor

 

(3) Any notice required or authorised by this Act to be served shall be sufficiently served if it is left at the last-known place of abode or business in the United Kingdom of the lessee, lessor, mortgagee, mortgagor, or other person to be served, or, in case of a notice required or authorised to be served on a lessee or mortgagor, is affixed or left for him on the land or any house or building comprised in the lease or mortgage, or, in case of a mining lease, is left for the lessee at the office or counting-house of the mine.

 

(4) Any notice required or authorised by this Act to be served shall also be sufficiently served, if it is sent by post in a registered letter addressed to the lessee, lessor, mortgagee, mortgagor, or other person to be served, by name, at the aforesaid place of abode or business, office, or counting-house, and if that letter is not returned through the post-office undelivered; and that service shall be deemed to be made at the time at which the registered letter would in the ordinary course be delivered

[cymruambyth]

Was the CRA experian?

[andrew1]

Lets just keep this simple for a minute and clear the complexities first:

 

Cabot do not act as a debt collection 'agency' they buy debt en-bloc...If they were an agency then they get 10% +/- based upon the value of the outstanding debt they are collecting against, they do not get ownership of the rights to the debt or anything like it, they just take a commission on the debt itself - or more spefically in this case - The Arrears which are due.

 

When Cabot buy debt the debt is Assigned to them and when a debt is assigned then the account as far as the OC is concerned and the LOP is closed. The Default would have happened earlier and when sold removed from the CRA and Cabot register their DN when they take the debt on. If the OC left their Default then they need to remedy that fast or suffer the fact that your credit history may be wrongfully affected. The Deed of Assignment has to be sent to you by both the OC and Cabot, check this thoroughly. These cannot be called ' Arrears unless Cabot are continuing to carry out the functions of the original contract, the rights, duties and all contractual obligations under the original contract - which they don't, so this cannot be referred to as arrears, they bought the account in toto so if they are asking for all the monies then they are pulling a fast one and need reminding they are... Geez, do they never learn?

 

Have they begun charging you their 12% interest rates yet? Let me know if they have and that is a part of their claim.

[andrew1]

Lets just keep this simple for a minute and clear the complexities first:

 

Cabot do not act as a debt collection 'agency' they buy debt en-bloc...If they were an agency then they get 10% +/- based upon the value of the outstanding debt they are collecting against, they do not get ownership of the rights to the debt or anything like it, they just take a commission on the debt itself - or more spefically in this case - The Arrears which are due.

 

When Cabot buy debt the debt is Assigned to them and when a debt is assigned then the account as far as the OC is concerned and the LOP is closed. The Default would have happened earlier and when sold removed from the CRA and Cabot register their DN when they take the debt on. If the OC left their Default then they need to remedy that fast or suffer the fact that your credit history may be wrongfully affected. The Deed of Assignment - NO , Not the DEED the NOTICE of Assignment, sorry!....has to be sent to you by both the OC and Cabot, check this thoroughly. These cannot be called ' Arrears unless Cabot are continuing to carry out the functions of the original contract, the rights, duties and all contractual obligations under the original contract - which they don't, so this cannot be referred to as arrears, they bought the account in toto so if they are asking for all the monies then they are pulling a fast one and need reminding they are... Geez, do they never learn?

 

Have they begun charging you their 12% interest rates yet? Let me know if they have and that is a part of their claim.

Edited November 9, 2010 by andrew1

[cymruambyth]

Have they begun charging you their 12% interest rates yet? Let me know if they have and that is a part of their claim.

 

Why please?

[shaaarn]

The CRA was CallCredit, Experian had very little info.

[shaaarn]

Lets just keep this simple for a minute and clear the complexities first:

 

Cabot do not act as a debt collection 'agency' they buy debt en-bloc...If they were an agency then they get 10% +/- based upon the value of the outstanding debt they are collecting against, they do not get ownership of the rights to the debt or anything like it, they just take a commission on the debt itself - or more spefically in this case - The Arrears which are due.

 

When Cabot buy debt the debt is Assigned to them and when a debt is assigned then the account as far as the OC is concerned and the LOP is closed. The Default would have happened earlier and when sold removed from the CRA and Cabot register their DN when they take the debt on. If the OC left their Default then they need to remedy that fast or suffer the fact that your credit history may be wrongfully affected. The Deed of Assignment has to be sent to you by both the OC and Cabot, check this thoroughly. These cannot be called ' Arrears unless Cabot are continuing to carry out the functions of the original contract, the rights, duties and all contractual obligations under the original contract - which they don't, so this cannot be referred to as arrears, they bought the account in toto so if they are asking for all the monies then they are pulling a fast one and need reminding they are... Geez, do they never learn?

 

Have they begun charging you their 12% interest rates yet? Let me know if they have and that is a part of their claim.

 

Yes 12% interest is being applied.

 

There has been no statements from Cabot as part of the duties of the lender and the first statement only came during disclosure.

 

S

[shaaarn]

THanks for all your help given folks it definately assisted in court today. However the matter has been adjourned until January due to defence and disclosure issues.

 

I will keep you all informed how I get on.

[Rhia]

Was anything of interest revealed in court? It also might be useful to post the POC on here so we know a bit more what we're looking at and try and help you further.

[DonkeyB]

Good, I hope. Now tell us absolutely everything you can – from square one...

[DonkeyB]

shaaarn, what are the issues?

[Rhia]

Funny you should ask this DonkeyB I was thinking the same. Close encounter of the Cabot kind?

[Hadituptohere]

Id say....not another I hope

 

Hadituptohere

[manchesteruni]

a what ?

[Rhia]

Sometimes manchesteruni posters are not what they appear to be and Cabot and other DCAs regularly monitor these forums and pretend to be genuine seekers of advice. However, the Fan Club has all its antennae twitching and can spot 'em a mile off.

 

They are often trying to trap you into giving details away or posing with a similar case to one that's at a vital stage to see if you can give them some idea of the argument. We're onto them. And Shaaan here may or may not be one such and we are very happy to be proven wrong which is why DonkeyB has asked "what are the issues"?

 

Their modus operandus is to post details of supposed cases, asking for help. Sometimes they even add the odd document but, let's be honest anyone can add a document with personal details edited out (or redacted as we all now like to say) and pretend to be that person.

 

The Cabot Fan Club frequently gets PMs from such and we are happy to give them the same advice we would give anyone on open forums. However keep your wits about you as they're here, they're there, there every flipping where. So stay alert!

 

Shaaan please give us details of your case and we'll be happy to help you as much as we can.

[pabrmu]

Hi Rhia,

I hope this is not what you suspect.

I will certainly be more careful with who I try to help, even with my limited ability.

However, thinking about it, I wouldn't put anything past these snakes.

Come on Shaarn, restore my faith in human nature.

Rhia, any chance of running your eye over my thread:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?280050-Help-with-Cabot-Set-aside-hearing.&highlight=pabrmu

Edited November 13, 2010 by pabrmu

[manchesteruni]

oh right. Have to say I can't see anything that suggest that. And surely if they were a 'plant' they would be saying they lost in order to discourage people trying it themselves ? Shaarn has another thread on here about the same case too with copies of the illegible agreement on which probably gives a bit more info.

[Rhia]

Well let's see shall we? The devil being in the detail and all. And Shaarn if you are indeed a real person then do accept my apologies and ask the site team to merge the numerous threads you have started.