Cabot Financial - Defending a court claim

[SHERLOCK]

Very wise words Andrew1, but here is the crux.

 

I WAS and STILL am paying! Problem is they have to push things and now have stirred a hornets nest because what I have found since joining CAG is the capacity to fight my corner with the help from yours truly etc.

 

As with all my creditors, if they leave me in peace they will get some payment (yes, even those with crappy / no agreements - for now anyway, cannot take on too much - each will get the same medicine eventually though) and most seem ok with this. However, it is generally the case that I kick up a fuss when they try to back me into a corner.

 

Morally corrupt I may be, but that doesn't make Cabot the good guy! (maybe I should check out the jobs at Cabot, it would seem we are good bed fellows). Cabot may well get what they want out of this but it won't be without a good ol' scrap and whilst your campaign is a very admirable one and 'is not to encourage the morally corrupt to not pay what is due' is it not the case that in actual fact monies are not 'due' because Cabot and the OC before them have seen fit to misuse / mis-interpret the law as they go along???

 

Would you believe I am a little miffed with this, they apply for a CCJ, THEN suggest I should sign a TO that now includes THEIR court fee and THEIR solicitor's fee, AND paythe same amount I was anyway! Basically, I wouldn't give a crap if Cabot went to the wall tomorrow, you make your bed, you gotta lie in it right!! AND MR MAYNARD, WHOEVER YOU ARE, YOU STILL HAVEN'T SENT ME MY CITIFINANCIAL AGREEMENT I ASKED FOR 2 YEARS AGO BUT STILL TAKE MY PAYMENT, YOU MORALLY CORRUPT HUMAN BEING. THIS IS NEXT ON MY LIST BY THE WAY!!

 

 

May I now officially declare myself a member of The Cabot Fan Club or do I have to change my moral stance to get my place at the table (I should be a LibDem MP) ,

 

Would you believe I am actually a very nice person who does not like conflict of any sort?

 

Dearest Rhia, Morgans / Cabot collections (the lady did say she was from Morgan's collections) rang me at 8am (I took the call) to ask about a payment plan, I pointed out that this account is the subject of court action, she went away, came back and said 'oh yeh, it's being dealt with in Rugby'!! happy hunting Andrew1.

 

Regards,

 

SHERLOCK

Edited June 29, 2010 by SHERLOCK

[andrew1]

Very wise words Andrew1, but here is the crux.

 

I WAS and STILL am paying! Problem is they have to push things and now have stirred a hornets nest because what I have found since joining CAG is the capacity to fight my corner with the help from yours truly etc.

 

As with all my creditors, if they leave me in peace they will get some payment (yes, even those with crappy / no agreements - for now anyway, cannot take on too much - each will get the same medicine eventually though) and most seem ok with this. However, it is generally the case that I kick up a fuss when they try to back me into a corner.

 

Morally corrupt I may be, but that doesn't make Cabot the good guy! (maybe I should check out the jobs at Cabot, it would seem we are good bed fellows). Cabot may well get what they want out of this but it won't be without a good ol' scrap and whilst your campaign is a very admirable one and 'is not to encourage the morally corrupt to not pay what is due' is it not the case that in actual fact monies are not 'due' because Cabot and the OC before them have seen fit to misuse / mis-interpret the law as they go along???

 

Would you believe I am a little miffed with this, they apply for a CCJ, THEN suggest I should sign a TO that now includes THEIR court fee and THEIR solicitor's fee, AND paythe same amount I was anyway! Basically, I wouldn't give a crap if Cabot went to the wall tomorrow, you make your bed, you gotta lie in it right!! AND MR MAYNARD, WHOEVER YOU ARE, YOU STILL HAVEN'T SENT ME MY CITIFINANCIAL AGREEMENT I ASKED FOR 2 YEARS AGO BUT STILL TAKE MY PAYMENT, YOU MORALLY CORRUPT HUMAN BEING. THIS IS NEXT ON MY LIST BY THE WAY!!

 

 

May I now officially declare myself a member of The Cabot Fan Club or do I have to change my moral stance to get my place at the table (I should be a LibDem MP) ,

 

Would you believe I am actually a very nice person who does not like conflict of any sort?

 

Dearest Rhia, Morgans / Cabot collections (the lady did say she was from Morgan's collections) rang me at 8am (I took the call) to ask about a payment plan, I pointed out that this account is the subject of court action, she went away, came back and said 'oh yeh, it's being dealt with in Rugby'!! happy hunting Andrew1.

 

Regards,

 

SHERLOCK

 

AND MR MAYNARD, WHOEVER YOU ARE, YOU STILL HAVEN'T SENT ME MY CITIFINANCIAL AGREEMENT I ASKED FOR 2 YEARS AGO BUT STILL TAKE MY PAYMENT, YOU MORALLY CORRUPT HUMAN BEING.

 

Couple of points Sherlock, hate to disappoint you, but the 'official' Cabot Fan Club closed doors to 'official' members long time ago, it's a long story, but we just like to think people are followers of the philosophy we began on the back of Cag's platform of unity amongst troubled people, you know, the kind of community Bankfodder started that sticks by everyone and supports one another at a time when creditors were abusing their position. Bankfodder was the epitome of the small man's fighter for the common cause which backed up the 'family' of which we are all members (Trolls excluded of course). So welcome to the followers club of the Cabot fan Club which is far stronger and more valuable than the fan club itself. We 8 are just a family of our own now after 4 yrs and I'd trust them-all of them with my life. We work in a unique way and have some extremely diverse talents which gell.

 

Secondly, offending Mr Maynard with comments like "YOU MORALLY CORRUPT HUMAN BEING" is not something we like to do because it brings us down to their levels. We are morally on the high ground so we like to poke fun, but keep it 'nice' so we don't hurt his feelings too much as it just costs him even more money on very expensive solicitors and just now the poor guy can't really afford them. So be gentle with him, he likes his teddy bears - he's only the CEO after all and that's a thankless task really being the face of the company.

 

[SHERLOCK]

I'm afraid that was the least complimentary statement I could make without getting banned from CAG!!

 

If he's not gonna succumb to abuse, through the courts it will be -

 

OK, just completing letters, they will be going off soon with another stay request!!

 

 

In my letter I have contained a:

• Notice to Admit
  
• CPR 31.14 Request
  

Incidentally, put the following paragraph below the request for 'deed of assignment', is this ok??

 

4, the Deed of Assignment* / Sales Assignment*

*where this may be contained within a master agreement that does / doesn’t contain my account then please be specific and where any sales sub-agreement for this specific account is mentioned in a paper schedule or other media but is, or may be, sold under the auspices of the master agreement mentioned above, please also provide evidence of this, along with legible account details.

 

Additionally it asks when requesting a stay for info as to the help / expert advice that I may be receiving....ANY TAKERS!!

 

SHERLOCK

Edited June 30, 2010 by SHERLOCK

[andrew1]

I'm afraid that was the least complimentary statement I could make without getting banned from CAG!!

 

If he's not gonna succumb to abuse, through the courts it will be -

 

OK, just completing letters, they will be going off soon with another stay request!!

 

 

In my letter I have contained a:

• Notice to Admit
  
• CPR 31.14 Request
  

Incidentally, put the following paragraph below the request for 'deed of assignment', is this ok??

 

4, the Deed of Assignment* / Sales Assignment*

*where this may be contained within a master agreement that does / doesn’t contain my account then please be specific and where any sales sub-agreement for this specific account is mentioned in a paper schedule or other media but is, or may be, sold under the auspices of the master agreement mentioned above, please also provide evidence of this, along with legible account details.

 

Additionally it asks when requesting a stay for info as to the help / expert advice that I may be receiving....ANY TAKERS!!

 

SHERLOCK

 

How could I resist Sherlock? - always up for a challenge against our friends

 

You have an eye I must say, glad to see, unlike so many others coming on here, that you've familiarised yourself with threads about the sales agreements. Spot on my friend. I could send you copies of most of the sales agreements between theirs truly and their clients having obtained numerous ourselves, but also a number donated by a very special admirer of Seahorse to the Fan Club library (which is extensive ) who comes from within.

 

Yours was Citi wasn't it? - I'll dig it out and refresh my memory of the content, safe to say though that the data is only supplied to Cabot on 2 discs or so on most of these deals they did. Just the basic stuff and not sufficient for them to have any copies of documents which they'd really need to ensure they were chasing the right people or realise the agreements are genuine or legit even. Any monkey can phone from a list, did it for years myself - trouble is this information gathered by monkey's is passed through the troop to Rugby where the baboons up there take over whilst Frank Spencer looks after and feeds them all

 

Sorry, mustn't get personal, I'm sure they are fine family people ( where did I put those banana's? ) ...

 

You obviously have a serious side to you Sherlock which has a good grasp of the way things are supposed to work, just make sure anything you do is checked out for you by people who, unlike yourself where it's obvious you have a good knowledge, but not quite sufficent to confidently execute this

from a legal prospective, first because getting legal things wrong and based upon unsure footing will cost you dearly as a LIP.

 

Pass it by a solicitor if you can afford to. It's safer and never go to court without a barrister if you can avoid it. We joke on here, but the seriousness of debt and the rule of thumb used by the likes of these DCA's of ' throw enough mud at the wall, some of it will stick' approach leaves debtors confused. They prey on this as many will not defend for being too scared (as you can see from the daft practice of sending everything via Northampton Bulk). We don't like this practice and efforts are being worked on the cap this so that'll be another problem they created, but will ultimately pay for - just like the Claims Management companies did - they went bust! Careful what yo wish for Kenny

 

I'll dig out that sales doc and see if there's anything you can use. What date was your agreement assigned Sherlock and how long after Cabot bought it?

[andrew1]

Woops system Glitch...?

 

System glitch

 

Woops! system clitch..?

Edited July 1, 2010 by citizenB
merged system glitches to one post :)

[SHERLOCK]

Hi Andrew1,

 

One thing I am is not stupid, I have a degree you know - (though by all accounts this isn't a pre-requisite to being clever either!) I find the major stumbling block is the time required to research, read, check and re-check, write up and even keeping track of where I am....all very time consuming work - on top of your usual day-to-day activities. I reckon that is the problem with other users, not that they are dumb or lazy (hell I've been guilty of this on more than 1 occasion!).

 

That said, it would seem I am up to my neck in it with this one, so I'm gonna have to stay on the ball and put all my reserves into this one account (there are others).

 

Onto business, the account was a Monument Card - Link to 'reply Card' received below. Card initially taken out in 2000 with Monument (Providian)

Receive 'reply card' agreement - Mar 2007 (Cabot state that letter encloses 'Original Application Form') http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...t-2584769.html Please note that the reply card in post 37 above contains an 'application form' barcode. This is a 2nd copy sent when requested after the ccj claim was filed. The 1st copy sent did not contain the barcode.

 

Defence filed as per post 50 - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...t-2667887.html - if a keen eye can be cast over this to ensure that this does still stand (i.e. no change through my issuing NoA and CPR 31.14) OR have I moved the goalposts in anyway??

 

I have Rhodium to thank for bringing my attention to how they will deal with the DoA request so I felt a little pre-empting their next move would maybe speed / tidy things up a little.

 

So, there we have it...Do you feel a 'without prejudice' cover letter to discontinue is the correct course at this moment (thank you Rhia) or will this play into their hands with the disclosure documents I am attempting to get my hands on, i.e would they drag their feet if it wasn't for a looming hearing??

 

Regards,

 

SHERLOCK

Edited June 30, 2010 by SHERLOCK

[andrew1]

Hi Andrew1,

 

One thing I am is not stupid, I have a degree you know - (though by all accounts this isn't a pre-requisite to being clever either!) I find the major stumbling block is the time required to research, read, check and re-check, write up and even keeping track of where I am....all very time consuming work - on top of your usual day-to-day activities. I reckon that is the problem with other users, not that they are dumb or lazy (hell I've been guilty of this on more than 1 occasion!).

 

That said, it would seem I am up to my neck in it with this one, so I'm gonna have to stay on the ball and put all my reserves into this one account (there are others).

 

Onto business, the account was a Monument Card - Link to 'reply Card' received below. Card initially taken out in 2000 with Monument (Providian)

Receive 'reply card' agreement - Mar 2007 (Cabot state that letter encloses 'Original Application Form') http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...t-2584769.html Please note that the reply card in post 37 above contains an 'application form' barcode. This is a 2nd copy sent when requested after the ccj claim was filed. The 1st copy sent did not contain the barcode.

 

Defence filed as per post 50 - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...t-2667887.html - if a keen eye can be cast over this to ensure that this does still stand (i.e. no change through my issuing NoA and CPR 31.14) OR have I moved the goalposts in anyway??

 

I have Rhodium to thank for bringing my attention to how they will deal with the DoA request so I felt a little pre-empting their next move would maybe speed / tidy things up a little.

 

So, there we have it...Do you feel a 'without prejudice' cover letter to discontinue is the correct course at this moment (thank you Rhia) or will this play into their hands with the disclosure documents I am attempting to get my hands on, i.e would they drag their feet if it wasn't for a looming hearing??

 

Regards,

 

SHERLOCK

 

One thing I am is not stupid, I have a degree you know -

 

Knew it, we can spot fools on here far too clever for the likes of Cabot!

 

You'll be lucky to get any kind of disclosure out of these people, far too slippery, but you can try.

 

Now I'm going to duck out of trying to point you onto any legal issues as I'm not legally trained, there are far more qualified people on here to do that for you, but what I do have is a vast portfolio of peoples accounts with Cabot and the correspondence they have received, legal case notes ( and even some of theirs ) which I can follow through with cases like yours with Monument. I have a vast amount on Monument so if you want to PM me an email address I might be able, subject to certain criteria I set myself with, to provide you with previous case histories, depersonalised of course from which to work from.

 

I'm going to be unavailable for a few days as I have a few meetings to attend to (as you say, some people have real jobs! ) but I'll pop in and out.

 

I'll leave you for the time-being to contemplate your next move and I do not want to hog this thread and deprive you of some of the more legally technical answers you require from other posters.

 

I'm glad you are finding other posters helpful though, many posters come on here to learn and we often know far more than the companies and firms personnel themselves. Having dealt with some of the largest practices and completely lost them in CCA terminology I find it quite rewarding to put these so called 'legally trained' people to the test and actually answer basic questions they should know, but don't! - goes hand in hand with what I said earlier...." All we ask is Cabot and any other DCA or Creditor to abide by the laws that regulated them - you'd be astonished at the state of some agreements we've seen legally, the DN's that are faulty, T&C's - these are supposed to be professionals...I could rant all day...good luck Sherlock, I'll go digging..

 

Don't suppose you could de-personalise your agreement and post it up could you?

[SHERLOCK]

Jeeze Andrew1, wakey, wakey that link above IS the agreement , apparently!! Can't you see it, the one with all the prescribed terms detailed within.................No thought not!

 

Here it is in GLORIOUS technicolour....

 

 

 

Just a thought, when I take a further look at this it is almost as if a photocopy of the 'terms and conditions' leaflet (thin strip down the centre) is on the reverse, very strange as I remember these agreements to be of thin card (creased down the middle) with a lickable sticky strip around the edge and a freepost address and stamp upon it.

 

Also wonder if there is any PPI on this as I have ticked the 'not employed' box.....mmm:???:

PM sent.

 

Regards,

 

SHERLOCK

Edited July 1, 2010 by SHERLOCK

[SHERLOCK]

Can't quite decipher the 'reputation' note received......can anyone enlighten me on the sender??

 

SHERLOCK

[SHERLOCK]

OK People, my letters defo have to go off today.

 

Received 2 letters y'day. One from Solicitors and one from Barclaycard(Bear in mind I sent Barclays a 'Letter Before Action' for all my info under the DPA).

 

Barclaycard sent me a 'list of all the default charges applied to the account for the last 6 years which covers the information you are looking for'. (identical letter to the reply I got for my initial subject access request under the DPA)

 

Amazingly, it was Morgan that sent me a letter with the Providian accounts (changes to Monument from Jan '04) relating to the account from 2003 to 2005 and apparently these show 'a complete record of the accrual of the outstanding balance because as at Oct 2003 the account had a zero balance. No earlier statements are available because they have been destroyed by the assignor (Barclays), in accordance with standard banking retention policy (6 years). The final statement also show Barclays internal accounting processes in preparation for assignment where they split different items into different account books. This does not represent a decrease in the outstanding balance. (about a £1000 difference where 'credits' have been applied such as 'Purchase Fin Chg Credit', 'Late Fee Credit, 'Cash Finance Charge Credit' etc.) Quote - 'In our opinion, we have now provided sufficient documentary evidence to prove our case and invite you to consider signing the previous enclosed Tomlin Order'.

 

a few points to consider:

 

Am I to assume they keep a copy of the 'agreement' dated 2000, yet destroy other paperwork between this and the 6 yr deadline?

 

Who is my argument with and do Morgan have the right to access my account statements?

 

Do I alter my letters in anyway, am I still to proceed with my requests for ALL my info.

 

Is it correct that they shouldn't be going into court without original DN, Notice of Assigment etc. (what if these were destroyed?)

 

are Morgan correct to state they have enough to 'prove' their case?

 

Before charges applied, account was at 3000, account suspended and 7 months later 4000!

 

Thanks again for all your advice,

 

SHERLOCK

Edited July 8, 2010 by SHERLOCK

[SHERLOCK]

Letters Done And Sent

[Rhia]

Hi Sherlock,

 

I was going to say carry on regardless. If BC has destroyed all docs prior to six years that will explain why there is no original agreement of any sort.

BC not keeping correct documentation is an example of unfair practices as highlighted by the OFT and under the UTCCRs.

 

Have a read of the OFT attachment...it may help.

 

 

All you can do now is sit back and await their response. agree with what you have done...well inso much as I would have done the same. Your argument is with Cabot/Morgans after all they were keen to buy the debt for peanuts and then hassle you into settling so they get the headache.

 

BTW if, as I suspect, BC do not have an original agreement then the debt is unenforceable (no matter what guff Morgans come out with). However, technically the debt still exists and they are allowed to remind you of this but not "drag you into court" remind you.

 

Have a look for the Dissecting the Manchester Test Case thread it's all about the agreement and prescribed terms.

oft854.pdf

[SHERLOCK]

Hi Rhia, you say the original agreement, are you referring to the pictured document above (thread 133) or another document I should be getting, i.e. is there a document that Providian will have signed and sent to me?

 

Incidentally, these were my requests under CPR Rules:

 

1, the Default Notice

2, the Termination Notice

3, Original Creditor ‘assigned balance’ confirmation letter.

4, the Deed of Assignment* / Sales Assignment*

 

*where this may be contained within a master agreement that does / doesn’t contain my account then please be specific and where any sales sub-agreement for this specific account is mentioned in a paper schedule or other media but is, or may be, sold under the auspices of the master agreement mentioned above, please also provide evidence of this along with legible account details.

 

And my Notice to Admit Facts Request:

 

1 that the Credit Agreement supplied does not contain the prescribed terms as per s 61(1)a of the Consumer Credit Act 1974; and

2 that any Default Notice as per s 88 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 has not been supplied to the defendant; and

3 that the amount claimed as per your (the claimant) Particulars of Claim are incorrect (and to be determined); Barclays having provided a (part) list of default charges applied to the account that have since been viewed as penalties and as such refundable (with interest).

 

Oh yes and this...........

 

 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

 

 

I am of the mind that; due to the apparent inability / wilful retention / non – production of documents, incorrect amounts claimed and further requests / delays evident, a respectful discontinuance be made with regard this court claim.

 

 

Thanks again,

 

SHERLOCK

Edited July 8, 2010 by SHERLOCK

[SHERLOCK]

should I be putting these up by the way or is it too late to worry? They're gonna get it recorded tomorrow anyway!

[Rhia]

Yes I think the item you posted earlier is what they deem to be the original agreement. It just isn't compliant and doesn't meet with s61 requirements or the Consumer Credit Regulations.

 

I would urge you to read the thread Dissecting the Manchester Test Case as it's a good debate and may well settle some of the questions in your own mind.

 

Under a s78 request when we write and ask for the agreement they are interpreting this in a narrow way which means they don't have to produce a proper copy of the actual agreement with the prescribed terms and your signature...which...to be fair...they are correct.

 

However in a court you are entitled to ask for the original copy to be produced. That copy HAS to have all the prescribed terms "within the four corners of the agreement" and this is where they are engaging in jiggery pokery and hoping you won't know.

 

This is from the Carey-v-HSBC Bank (plc) (2009) EWHC 3417 (QB) 23 December 2009.

 

"108. Accordingly, I conclude that Reg. 7 requires a copy of the executed agreement in its original form as well as a statement of the terms as they are at the time of the request."

 

In other words they can't just chuck some T&Cs at you and say this is the agreement. I had forgotten your card was Monument and not a BC even though it's been bought out by BC.

 

Now they have provided an "agreement" but that agreement does not have the prescribed terms as pre s61(1) of the CCA and as this was entered into pre 2007 then s 127(3) comes into play and the court cannot enforce this if you have suffered prejudice...which you most certainly have.

 

The Manchester Dissection Thread explores all of this.

 

Your requests are as we all discussed and should rattle their cage a bit. Let's see what happens next but use the time to sharpen up your arguments in case it all goes the distance.

[SHERLOCK]

Hi all,

 

received reply (I was warned) of Morgans' stance with regard the CPR Request and their apparent requirement to not provide documents 'because they are not mentioned in the statement of case'.

 

 

This is in regard to the

• DN (not required under S87 (1) of the CCA 1974)
  
• Termination Notice
  
• original creditor 'assigned balance' confirmation (not required under the Law of Property act or at all)
  

With regard the Deed of Assignment, this is also not referred to but will however be retrieved and a copy sent.

 

I haven't received a reply to the Notice to Admit.

 

Having received this knock back and having sent the OC a 'letter before action' and reported them to the ICO (haven't received reply of any sort), what do I have to do to retrieve the wished for documents.

 

I still don't get why when I SAR Barclay's that Morgan's sent me my statements....any ideas??

 

I am ploughing thru the Manchester thread!!

 

Thanks , Sherlock

[pmhcfc]

 

I still don't get why when I SAR Barclay's that Morgan's sent me my statements....any ideas??

 

Thanks , Sherlock

 

And I still don't know why you're paying Cabot (as per your June posting) if all they have is an application form.

 

It's funny, but what they sent you is exactly what Cabot sent me when I CCA'd them almost 4 years ago. And for those four years I refused to pay on that basis - leading to the alleged debt now being statute barred - Hardly rocket science

[SHERLOCK]

Fair shout pmhcfc, so what do you suggest?? Rocket science it aint, but then why am I, and 100's like me, having to defend these claims and the like with 'application form / reply card' agreements.

 

If I refuse to pay where does that leave me with regard their County Court Claim?

 

Are you suggesting I just don't pay UNTIL I get the requested info, and then only if they are legally correct?

 

OR just plain refuse to pay on the basis that the 'reply card' does not conform?? I have to at least prove this though, right?

 

awaiting instructions,

 

SHERLOCK

[cups]

Hi Sherlock

 

Just a quickie for you,,Hadit told me to send Morgans an N268 which is a form to prove a original doc,,it is in my thread which I have done,,it is in CPR 32.19, well worth doing.

 

If you look at the app form that Cabots have sent you,,the scanned barcode on the bottom that says 'application form' is theirs! That is not from BC or anyone else. That is scanned in by Cabots, so there must be something that they got from BC. The reason I know this is that when they sent me my court bundle for their WS they had scanned in my letters to them and they have used a barcode system on the scans!!

 

Hope it helps

 

Cups

[comino51]

I put my alleged account with Cabot into dispute last November when they could not supply me with the original documents that were with Goldfish. They said that they would keep account on hold until they could provide these, that was January the last letter from them. Received letter yesterday as though I was a new customer thanking me for my payment (have not paid since last year) and asking for me to set up a repayment plan with them. Noticed that they have added almost £2,000 in interest in 13 months when Account in dispute, and they had agreed to hold interest payments. What should I do next?

[Rhia]

Start a new thread. This one's hilarious. It's been going for four years and never gets anywhere.

[SHERLOCK]

OOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHH Rhia, that hurts!

 

Hiya cups I tried the documents thing (unofficial route) and they insist that the documents i requested were NOT part of the claim. Also, part 1 rules this out for small claims:

 

Scope of this Part

 

31.1

 

(1) This Part sets out rules about the disclosure and inspection of documents.

 

(2) This Part applies to all claims except a claim on the small claims track.

 

 

 

Notice to admit or produce documents

 

32.19

 

(1) A party shall be deemed to admit the authenticity of a document disclosed to him under Part 31 (disclosure and inspection of documents) unless he serves notice that he wishes the document to be proved at trial.

 

stayed til 8th Oct, gonna have to sort asap, getting bogged down again!! SHERLOCK

[Rhia]

Oh welcome back. I wondered where you'd been. 8-)

 

Without trawling back have you defo been allocated to SC.

[SHERLOCK]

yep, def SC. Got all paperwork in front of me now.

 

Looking back my original defence was to rely on the case of Wilson & Ors 2003 and sect 61 CCA 1974 and Sch.6 of the 1983 Regs.

 

I requested various documents and, as stated in above post, they said they do not have to send them as they had not been referred to / no requirement to provide in law or at all!

 

This was also the case with the DoA, but they said they will send it once it is retrieved from their archive (not received as yet, letter dated 14th July 2010).

 

I do have recourse with regard the charges applied 400 pound over 7/8 months. and this also renders the claim amount (as on original claim form) redundant.

 

Additionally, they sent statements for '03 - '05, and they state that no earlier statements are available because they have been destroyed by the assignor. On this note they also state the statements show a complete record of the accrual of the outstanding balance because as at that date 31st October 2003 the account had a zero balance - However, when I looked within a credit file showing this account, where there is a series of zero's (to outline missed payments) half way thru, it shows a 1 and a 2, indicating that within the period prior to '03 I missed payments and as such will have been charged.

 

cash and purchase interest and fees were continuing to be added from when I made my last payment June '04 -Feb '05. The bal 3100 ended on 3900. To the rear of the statements, apparently, Monument credit all charges back to the account (1000 pound) prior to assignment to show a bal of 2950.

 

Morgan are claiming for the full balance 3900.

 

I am of the mind to try to get the claim thrown out as there are too many anomolies (IS THIS POSSIBLE) any thoughts,

 

Regards, SHERLOCK.

Edited October 4, 2010 by SHERLOCK

[Rhia]

Have you counterclaimed using contractual interest applied as being Monument it will probably be at least 30% (you hint you have as you say charges render it all redundant). Crafty move by Monument to refund to the account but this will be the minimum they can get away with whilst stating we refunded all charges.

 

There is so much wrng with this case which should be working for you.