Cabot problem re old CITI Card account

[tifo]

Citi insist they 'recalled' (repurchased) the account in January 2007, June 2009, September 2010 and December 2010 ......

 

I've only ever had one Notice of Assignment from Cabot in January 2003 when they bought it from Citi. Nothing from Cabot to Citi.

 

Cabot now have 2 accounts for the 1 Citi account, each with a different balance. Payments were last made to Cabot in Jan 2007 after it was first assigned in Jan 2003. Payments were last made to Citi over 6 years when they again assigned it to Cabot, who agree this second assignment is statute barred.

Edited June 22, 2011 by tifo

[Bazooka Boo]

So long as you are 100% certain it's SB then fire off the SB letter.

[tifo]

Citi have got their legal team involved due to me saying they haven't been conforming to laws of assignment and passing account back and forth between them and Cabot and that it's not clear who legally owned the account during certain periods.

 

Should I be worried?

[Bazooka Boo]

God NO!

 

Worried about what? Some tin pot two bit farcical clown outfit who doesn't know right from left, and their hilarious "Legal" team......it's only words, designed to intimidate, their legal team consists of.....

[tifo]

their legal team consists of....

 

That's good ....

[tifo]

Citi say (correctly) that if a debtor is not informed of any transfer then the it is an 'equitable' assignment and that this made them the legal creditor again (wrong). What they won't answer is how a legal assignment can be completed without a Notice of Assignment to the debtor, which is what they are saying has happened.

 

Since they now accept the assignment was equitable, their 'selling' the account again to Cabot is wrongful data processing, isn't it? Because they had no legal right to do this.

 

End result, I now have Cabot chasing me for the same account under 2 ref numbers even though they're aware it's the same account. Citi say this is not their problem and to contact Cabot as the legal creditor.

[tifo]

I had a credit card some years ago which was sold to a DCA in 2005 and fully settled in 2007 at the DCA with around £850. The default expired in 2010.

 

I then reclaimed default charges and ppi from the credit card company and to date this is ongoing because they won't offer the money to me but want to set-off against a 'debt' at the DCA. The FOS has said they can do this and i'm not entitled to the refund. I continue to chase though.

 

The DCA seems to be reporting a 'partial' settlement to the bank even though I paid the whole amount. What the balance is I have no idea but it can't be much (the refund would wipe it out anyway).

 

This means I've paid twice for the account. Once to fully settle it and again through the refund.

 

More worrying though, is that now the bank tells me the account was defaulted in 2008 and sold to the same DCA with a balance of around £1,400.

 

This means the account was sold in 2005 and I paid £850 in 2007 to fully settle it, the default expired in 2010. It was again defaulted in 2008 (I had no idea) and sold with a balance of £1,400.

 

I don't understand what's happened but will of course look into it. I don't know how the bank can sell the account again with a balance almost double what they sold it for first time (which was correct with default charges, PPI and interest).