Cabot - Halifax Credit Card - Cabot now started Court Action - Help Please ***SETTLED***

[lamb909]

Received reply from Cabot this morning, firstly starts letter with

 

further to your request please find enclosed all of the relevant informarion following your request for information under section (77-78) of the CCA 1974. we can confirm that we have provided a reconstituted true copy of your credit agreement which for the avoidance of doubt complies with the consumer credit (cancellation notices and copies of documents) Regulations 1983 and therefore complies with the obligations set out in sectopm (77-78) of the CCA 1974.

 

It goes on to say they can now enforce the debt etc...........

 

 

There are pages and pages typed out including repayments, interest rate etc etc. my name and address is printed on them but there is no signature of mine and no credit limit mentioned apart from an example of one (not the credit linit I had) and there is no date on the pages at all. Its a Halifax credit card, maybe taken out in 2005/2006, it was before they became HBOS if that helps. There are also copies of statements which of course are dated.

 

Does anybody know where I stand please and could advise I would be very grateful. Not sure how to reply or if I should make arrangements to pay them, cant afford it but dont want a CCJ

 

Thanks in advance

[harrassed senior]

It would be helpful if you could scan and upload 'reconstituted true copy'. Usually the first couple of pages will be a start for opinions as to its' enforceability. I can say straight away that they have admitted it is a reconstituted agreement which does indeed satisfy their response to your CCA Request, however, that being said, as an admitted reconstituted agreement it is not enforceable in a Court of Law. There is a template I can advise sending, but see what others think for now.

[lamb909]

Thanks for replying but I don't have a scanner, will try and list whats on firts couple of pages

 

application form - this has like a bar code above it

 

credit agreement agreement regulated by the cca 1974

 

this is a copy of your agreement to keep. it includes a notive about cancellation rights which you should read

 

1. parties - their details and mine

 

2. key financial info - says we will decide credit limit and tell you what it is, we may change it etc

 

we will send you a monthly statement, you must pay 2% or £5 whichever is more

 

the apr for the agreement is 16,9% apr (variable)

 

3. other financial info

 

total charge for credit is 130.98 consistingn of 130.98 interest this is based on credit of 1500 being borrowed at the start of the agreement over one year etc etc

 

lists various interest rates for balance transfers, cash advances ect

 

this continues on to next page where it says how they apply interest to my account and allocate payments.

 

4. key info

 

we will charge 25 when payment not recived by payment date, over cerdit limit, each timr a dd, cheque is not paid/

 

we will charge handling fees for cash advances, balace transfers and cheques etc

 

 

Does this help at all?

[lamb909]

This is honestly a bit difficult to comment on without seeing the real thing but on the face of it, it sounds like the usual Cabot hogwash. If you can beg borrow or buy a scanner because if Cabot take things to court you will really need one to copy all their letters etc to show the DJ.

 

No way of getting hold of a scanner I'm afraid, don't know what else to do, its just loads of pieces of a4 paper typed on......................................sorry

[harrassed senior]

How many pages does the alleged agreement run to, and when was this taken out and with whom. This information may help with advise being available on the general stuff they send for different companies.

[creditcardmug]

Ok, basically, on the page you signed, there must be the "prescribed terms", are these on there?, or is there a reference to them being "overleaf"

Type in prescribed terms in search to find out what they are, or wait for another member to point you to it.

[lamb909]

It has not got a signature on it at all, nor is there a box to sign one. There is a box to sign for PPi but I havent signed it. Nobody from the Halifax has signed it.

It was a Halifax CC, taken out approx 2005/06, the document is not dated so will have to check CR to find out when I took it out.

There is approx 10 pages, all A4, all typed out like you would a document. There is also another lot that state "This is your copy"

It doesn't have a credit limit, it does have "Right To Cancel"

No refereence to "Overleaf" that I can see

 

Does this help at all? Really am sorry

[creditcardmug]

Heres a letter you can send, head it with "I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY OR ANY COMPANY YOU CLAIM TO REPRESENT"

Dont sign your name just print

Expect them to constantly argue the point with you forever and a day

 

Your ref: XXX

 

Re; your recent reply to my request under section 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

I note that you have replied to the above by sending your companies current Terms and conditions I must inform you that this is not sufficient to comply with the request and that your company is still in default under the act.

 

To clarify, just sending the Terms and Conditions is a breach of the Act and Regulations as, apart from the information that the Regulations provide that you may exclude, the copy must be a “true copy” of the agreement.

 

This breach of the agreement can be demonstrated as follows;

As you will know section 180(1) (b) authorises, “the omission from a copy of certain material from the original, or the inclusion of certain material in condensed form.” This refers to statutory instruments made under the heading Copies of document regulations and in this care in particular to SI 1983/1557.

 

Before leaving section 180 there are two other sections that should be remembered these are:

 

Section 2(2) (a) A duty imposed by any provision of this Act (except section 35) to supply a copy of any document is not satisfied unless the copy supplied is in the prescribed form and conforms to the prescribed requirements;

 

And more importantly

 

Section 2(b) A duty imposed by any provision of this Act (except section 35) to supply a copy of any document is not infringed by the omission of any material, or its inclusion in condensed form, if that is authorised by regulations.

 

You will see that this quite clearly states that whilst certain items may be left out of the copy document the rest of the document must be in the form and contain all items as prescribed by the regulations.

 

Turning to the regulations regarding what may be omitted from these copies these are contained with SI 1983/1557.

 

The regulations state:

(2) There may be omitted from any such copy-

(a) any information included in an executed agreement, security instrument or other document relating to the debtor, hirer or surety or included for the use of the creditor or owner only which is not required to be included therein by the Act or any Regulations thereunder as to the form and content of the document of which it is a copy;

(b) any signature box, signature or date of signature (other than, in the case of a copy of a cancelable executed agreement delivered to the debtor under section 63(1) of the Act, the date of signature by the debtor of an agreement to which section 68(b) of the Act applies);

 

It is quite clear what can be omitted from the copy document, this again asserts that all other details of the agreement should presented in form and content as required by the regulations.

 

The requirements of the Agreement regulations 1983/1553 are very explicit in describing the form and content of an agreement and this as I have demonstrated also applies to the copy of any such agreement with the above mentioned proviso.

 

Nowhere within these regulations does it state that part of the agreement can be presented on a separate document headed terms and conditions.

It does state that all terms and conditions should be within the agreement document and is explicit of the form in which it is presented.

 

I hope this explains why your reply was unacceptable I await a True copy of my agreement and would remind you again that whilst the request has not been complied with the default continues

 

Yours faithfully

__________________

Edited May 11, 2011 by citizenB

[creditcardmug]

For your information

 

The prescribed terms required in Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) which was amended by Consumer Credit (Agreements) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI2004/1482). The prescribed terms referred to are contained in schedule 6 column 2 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and are inter alia: - A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or that there is no credit limit, A term stating the rate of any interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement and A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following--

1. Number of repayments;

2. Amount of repayments;

3. Frequency and timing of repayments;

4. Dates of repayments;

5. The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable

 

[lamb909]

recieved a reply and im lost, please somebody help

 

i refer to your letter dated.......

i understand you have recived our response to your request under sectin 78 of the cca 1974 however you state that you have only provided with a copy of the cabots grroups current t&cs

 

i have reviewed the documentation provided with our letter and confirm that you have recieved a true copy of your original credit agreement in addition to a true copy of the varied agreement applicable to your your account at the time it was terminated. the defination of true copy as prescribed in regulation 3 of the consumer credit (cancellation notices and copies of documents) regulations 1983 staes what information can be ommitted from a copy of a credit agreement. furthermore case law shows that a true copy does not mean an exact copy.

 

the documentation satisfies cabots obligation under section 78 of the cca, its associated regulations and the recent guidance published by oft in relation to requests of this nature

 

i note your reference to the cc (agreements) regulations 1983/1553. please note that as you entered into this agreement with halifax on 30 november 2005 the apllicable arethe consumer credit (agreements) (amendment) regulations 2004 which came into force on 31 may 2005

 

in the event that you believe the documentation does notcomply please clarify and particularise your points in order for us to invesigate and respond accordingly/

 

it then goes say they look forward to my offer ofrepayments,

 

please, please, please help if you can

Edited November 8, 2010 by lamb909

[ashmk]

Search google for a halifax CCA, find one thats the same as yours and link to it so we can see.

 

Cabot are masters of bullsh*t and will write all sorts to confuse you. Do not take anything at face value.

 

First things first, find us a CCA that matches yours.

[lamb909]

Its similar to this one but does not have the first page or the last 3, hope that makes sense

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=9112&d=1243010326

[DonkeyB]

It looks as though they have provided a reconstituted CCA in line with that allowed by Carey v HSBC. This does not require signatures or dates, but must include the correct address when originally provided, together with your name. They must also provide a current version of those T&Cs if different, again with the correct name and address. If they say it is a true copy, then the wording (as well as your name and address) must be absolutely accurate and identical in wording (not layout) to the original. Failure to be identical is fatal.

 

(They can get the name/address information from any source – it does not have to be gleaned from the original CCA. However, it MUST be accurate. This begs the question, ‘why not just provide the original CCA?’ I think there are two answers: (a) they don’t have it, or (b) it’s cheaper to send a recon rather than dig out the original, as it satisfies a s78 request.)

 

However, while this complies with a s78 request, it does NOT mean the debt is enforceable in court. The McGuffick ruling also means they can continue chasing, even if they do not have the original agreement.

 

To enforce this debt in court, they should be forced to produce the ORIGINAL agreement (or a genuine facsimile copy), not a reconstruction. However (and sadly) some judges have fallen for the reconstructed version, as they have not fully understood the Carey ruling, so beware.

 

In that respect, you are being fobbed off (they may even be, er, fibbing) when they claim this document makes the debt enforceable. It most certainly does not.

[lamb909]

Thanks so much, should I resopond at all and if so how, I have no idea what to say. Really appreciate your help. Do you think they likely to take it to court?

How can I find out if the wording is indentical to the original CCA? Really appreciate your help

[DonkeyB]

Thanks so much, should I resopond at all and if so how, I have no idea what to say. Really appreciate your help. Do you think they likely to take it to court?

Perhaps a letter pointing out that a s78 reconstruction is allowed for satisfying a s78 request as per Carey v HSBC, but that a reconstructed agreement CANNOT be used to enforce a debt, as the ORIGINAL would be required (Carey again).

How can I find out if the wording is indentical to the original CCA? Really appreciate your help

 

You can’t, unless you get a copy of the original.

 

Have a browse through this thread.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?173201-why-you-shouldnt-use-section-77-78-CCA-1974-if-you-want-the-signed-agreement

[Deb T]

Cabot will churn out important looking letters and they'll fill them full of usefull but altogether irrelevant jargon in an attempt to make them sound

as if they know what they're doing....in most cases they appear not to have a bloomin clue.

 

Assert yourself, do not let these useless articles fool you into any kind of submission.

Edited May 11, 2011 by citizenB

[lamb909]

Cabot will churn out important looking letters and they'll fill them full of usefull but altogether irrelevant jargon in an attempt to make them sound

as if they know what they're doing....in most cases they appear not to have a bloomin clue.

 

Assert yourself, do not let these useless articles fool you into any kind of submission.

 

Problem is I dont know how to assert myself, they are fooling me and I just don't know what to about it, its serioulsy affecting me, have posted on that thread that Donkey give me link to but its worrying me as it says a lot about court and it frightening me to b ehonest, lost my job, lost my new job, cant find another job, up to neck in debt, family dont want to know, girlfriend kicked me into touch, had enough to be frank. Thought I could deal with the debt when I found this place but I'm not thick but I dont understand all the legal jargon, seriously down.

[DonkeyB]

Mate, it takes a long time and an awful lot of reading to get up to speed on this. So keep reading and learning – you almost have to treat it like swotting for an exam. We’ve all been there, and there’s no easy route.

 

Maybe you should look upon dealing with this situation successfully as the first step back up the ladder.

[lamb909]

i refere to your letter dated.............................

Cabot has previously responded to the issues you have raised and our position remains unchanged. I would with respect advise you that you have been misinformed in relation to the issues you continue to raise and you have no groundss for your continued dispute and failure tp repay your financial liabilitities

on reviewing your account it is evident that you are delaying payment of this account. however it is the case that you agreed to the terms of thecredit agreement in order to recieve and utilise the credit available, it is also clear from statements which you have previously recieved that you have had the benefit of these funds available to you and you have failed to repay this. in addition you have previously made payments to halifax which again is clear evidence that you acknowledge responisibility for the above account

not withstanding the above i can conform that we have made another request to halifax for a signed copy of the agreement and upon receipt this shall be forwarded immediatly. however i must inform you that as we are somehwat dependant on the oroginal ;lender fto guaor this information i am unable to guarantee that we will be able to obtain this

the customer assurance department will not enter into any further correspondance with you regarding this matter as we have continually responded to the issues you have raised. as a gesture of goodwill we have placed your account on hold forv a further 14 days during which time we require you to contact our collections department on ...............................to arrange a repayment plan. failing which your account will be escalated in our collections process

i trust we have set our positopn clearly.

[DonkeyB]

Pile of crap. The have not supplied the CCA so the account remains in default. They have no option but to put the account on hold until they comply.

[deannat003]

Yes, I think this letter shows they know full well they aren't complying.., otherwise why would they be trying to get hold of the original agreement if what they provided made the debt enforceable..,there'd be no need? They also would not need to put the debt on hold. I think this letter is actually a positive sign.

[lamb909]

Really? Bl))dy h£ll you guys are great, will still do some more readif ng though, should I reply, seems pointless if they are not going to correspondance with me further? Could they go to court with this, guessing not but just want to make sure

 

Cheers for all your help, much appreciated

[DonkeyB]

That letter would make them look stupid in court. By refusing to respond, you can immediately complain to the Financial Ombudsman. Certainly complain to the OFT.

 

That letter was written by an idiot.

[lamb909]

Morning

 

Received yet another letter from the lovely Cabot saying my account has been sent to the Pre Litigation dept where one of the following will happen

 

warrent of execution

charging order

attachment of earnings

an order to obtain information

 

or they will instruct an external debt collection agency or legal agency to call on me

 

 

 

Now, if they were going to take me to court why might they instruct another DCA

And going from the advice already given kindly by folks ob here, there is not a lot they can do without the original CCA, am I understanding this right? Should I be worried?

 

Lots of thanks to those who can help

[DonkeyB]

...and they are still in default of your legitimate CCA request.

 

Send the reminder letter again! It will all look very good for you if they do try legal action. Of course, you still have the letter written by the Cabot village idiot which states they don’t actually have any agreement on which to base their case – not even a recon.