cabot / jd williams reconstructed cca

[spidey41]

recieved a copy of a reconstructed cca from cabot this morning with my name and adress handwritten in and no signitures on the cca , the letter from cabot states,

 

we can confirm we have provided a reconstituted true copy of your credit agreement which for the avoidance of doubt complies with the consumer creditregulations 1983 and therefore complies with the obligations set out in section 77-78 of the consumer credit act 1974

 

were do i stand on this

[dx100uk]

how old is the account

 

is it on your cra file?

 

dx

[spidey41]

its not on file no ,

account was opened in 2005 actually

last payment was in june 2007 so nearly stat barred anyway ,

 

just wondered if they can actually get away with sending an agreement stating this is what your agreement would have looked like ,

 

its not even signed by anybody and the statements they have sent do not even have a name or account no on so could be anybodys statements

[dx100uk]

what is the debt

 

who was the org creditor

 

dx

[spidey41]

the debt is for a catologue , original creditor is jd williams home shopping

[dx100uk]

pers i'd ignore them.

 

if its off you cra file

means it was defaulted more than 6yrs ago.

 

if that's the case

then are you sure on your last payment?

did you pay after it was defaulted?

 

dx

[spidey41]

no payment has been made after defaulted no , there are several 12.00 charges added after last payment in june 2007 but no payments from myself

[dx100uk]

post 3 you said june 2007.

 

if its not on your cra file

that means it must have been defaulted more than 6yrs ago. [pre may 07]

 

dx

[spidey41]

yes june 2007 was last payment , last post said this as well ,

[dx100uk]

post 7 says you did not make a payment after the default

 

so cant be true.

 

anyhow.

 

as its only a couple of weeks to sb

 

pers id be ignoring them.

 

no point in entering into letter tennis with any debt within easy sb

 

dx

[spartathisis]

Cabot just been sold and looks like they may be raking up some old stuff in the hope of a quick buck for the new owners.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

post 7 says you did not make a payment after the default

 

so cant be true.

 

anyhow.

 

 

 

 

as its only a couple of weeks to sb

 

pers id be ignoring them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

no point in entering into letter tennis with any debt within easy sb

 

dx

I agree leave it alone, make sure of your facts then it's the SB letter.

[spidey41]

okay last payment was 01/06/2007 i made sure the stat barred letter was sent that day , i recieved a response already from cabot stating this was the last payment but is not stat barred until 6 years from the date the default notice was sent , can somebody just confirm this is correct please , as of yet i have not recieved date of default notice and do not even recall getting one in the first place

[dx100uk]

usual response from them.

 

they always say that trying to spoof punters.

 

sb is from your last payment/ack and they know it.

 

dx

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Ok send this to:

 

The Compliance Director

Cabot Financial Europe Ltd

 

Ref : use theirs.

Complaint: Deliberately Misleading Information.

Sir / Madam,

 

I refer to a letter from Cabot dated xx xx xxxxx, in which Cabot states that the alleged debt for £ xxx .xx arising from an account with xxxxxxxxxxxx, is not statute barred because the limitations period (6 years) begins from the date a default notice was sent, this appears to be a deliberate attempt to mislead me and to obtain a financial advantage by deceit.

 

I am sure Cabot are aware (or should be) that the limitation period starts from the date are payment was due and not paid, after which no further payment was ever made and or no unequivocal written acknowledgment of liability was made in 6 clear years.

 

Whether this is a case of deliberate deception or of gross incompetence it has caused me considerable stress and anxiety and I WILL be making a complaint to the OFT regarding Cabots conduct in this matter, together with a comment on the fitness of Cabot to hold a Consumer Credit Licence.

 

I am sure I do not have to quote chapter and verse of the OFT Guidance on Debt Collection 2003 updated November 2012 as Cabot should be fully aware of the breaches of the guidance it has committed..

 

I now formally state that the alleged debt is STATUTE BARRED and I will not be making any payment in relation to this matter.

 

If Cabot continues to press for payment I will make a complaint of harassment.

Given Cabots despicable conduct and the an the anxiety it has caused me it is my opinion that Cabot should seriously consider

financial redress of at least £100.00 to compensate me in this matter.

 

I require Cabot to confirm in writing that it has (a). Removed all data relating to me from its records. and (b). That the alleged debt is statute barred and the matter is closed.

Finally I would remind Cabot of section 3.23 ©. (Data Accuracy). Failing to identify to prospective debt purchasers debts know to be statute barred, should this matter reappear at anytime in the future under the name of a 3rd party the matter will be referred to the regulators and the company that has acquired the debt.

 

This is my final response.

[spidey41]

thanks got that

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

thanks got that

 

OK spidey I think that'll rattle their cage imo it is disgraceful conduct.

 

Keep us informed please.

[citizenB]

nononono.. they are misleading you ..

 

 

Many DCAs will argue that limitation accrues from the time when the "default notice" is issued.It does not.

 

Limitation clock starts ticking from when the payment is due and not paid not when they send a default notice.

 

We see often that CRA entries will date 5 or 6 months ahead of when the payment was missed.

 

People need to be sure that they aren’t being hoodwinked and that the DCA is extending limitation so they can sue when they are not allowed to.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Nasty trick see a similar one elsewhere to day, DCA claims debt not SB had refunded a £12 LP charge immediately before selling the account, so good dispel their illusions and delusions.

This kind of deceptive and misleading practice is something we all need to be alert to.

[sequenci]

We will probably see way, way, way more of this sort of thing due to the judgment of BMW Financial Services (GB) Limited v Hart

 

It seems, that in certain situations, it may be possible to prevent the limitation clock running by not service the notice.

[citizenB]

have you got a link to that judgment, sequence ?

[sequenci]

Not one that's in the public domain that I've found so far. if you google the case you can find plenty of commentary. Do, though, bear in mind that this judgment was for car finance (hire-purchase).

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

The flaw here seems to be that this 'agreement' is not apparently regulated under CCA 1974, yet comment directs to the CCA 1974, one would have to seek clarification of the validity of any claim by a debt purchaser or DCA that the limitations period when applied to a regulated non HP agreement, imo it is not valid outside the case scenario of unregulated HP agreements>

[sequenci]

It'll be interesting to see what happens going forward, that's for sure.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I would like to see a DCA try this!!