Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi Lolerz Thanks for replying to me, yes I've been ignoring her & will continue to do so. All she keeps saying is they want to come up with an amicable settlement. Keeps saying this to our receptionist she shouldn't be saying this to a receptionist or even me in the first place as they have given no proof of anything no IP addresses noting just keeps saying about an amicable settlement.
    • If a DCA supplies a reconstituted copy of the CCA what would be the next step? It seems that a reconstituted copy must be a " true copy " of the executed agreement, it must contain the Prescribed Terms. But given that there is no copy of the applicants signature surely it could be an agreement form with the details filled in. How can it be assumed that this " copy " represents a true copy that the claimant has supposed to have signed. Cabot have demonstrated a bit of sabre rattling when they say "Until we're able to provide this information , your account is unenforceable. This means we're not permitted to obtain a County Court judgement against you . Whilst we cannot pursue legal action, your balance remains outstanding ". I looked up a case... Cabot UK Ltd  v  Bachellier (2010) which might help, but it's tough reading, I'd prefer to plough through War and Peace. This particular case with Cabot is not huge , approx' £140, but the only other worry that I have is also with Cabot...£2100. They may try to make a point with lesser case.
    • you'll never find a court open on a w/end MB. all courts are closed Good Friday and Bank Holiday Monday. However as Andy points out, that does NOT mean you get 2 extra days to file, you get one, same as xmas/new Year. UKPC have not filed their, so no rush on yours as dave says.  
    • Top US magazine slams Britain after 14 years of Tory ‘psychodrama’ The New Yorker’s excoriating report on the state of the UK lays bare how Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union (EU) “catalysed some of the worst tendencies in British politics”. “The only way to think about it is as a psychodrama enacted, for the most part, by a small group of middle-aged men who went to élite private schools, studied at the University of Oxford, and have been climbing and chucking one another off the ladder of British public life" Top US magazine slams Britain after 14 years of Tory ‘psychodrama’ WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK The New Yorker’s excoriating report on the state of the UK lays bare how Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union (EU) “catalysed...  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

cabot old £7k HFC Bank OD - now ruthbridge letter - never had HFC OD


hollysmum
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2001 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

My husband received a letter from this shower on Friday morning, telling him that he owed over £7k on a current account with HFC Bank.

 

To the very best of his knowledge, he's never had any sort of account with HFC

- is a "prove it" letter in order to start with?

 

We intend telling them that he denies it is his debt, in any case.

 

Thank you all so much. Catherine

 

Just adding to my own post

- I have looked again at the letter from Ruthbridge

- it accompanies one from the lovely Cabot Financial, which is telling my husband that, as they have not come to a mutual agreement with him to repay "his" debt, they are passing it on to Ruthbridge.

 

There is no account number given for this alleged current account with HFC Bank, only a reference number from Ruthbridge.

 

I'm inclined to think that this is a phishing exercise

- he's never had anything from Cabot about anything.

 

Thank you again.

Catherine.

Edited by dx100uk
merge
Link to post
Share on other sites

Start off by sending them an SAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

pers i'd be sending the SB letter if hes paid nowt in over 6yrs.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They must be phishing,

 

 

I've had a similar letter from Ruthbridge albeit accompanied by an introduction letter to them via Cabot on an alleged debt where the last communication with the original OC was 2003 (no correspondence from anyone else ever until now, with the best will in this would have been stat barred since 2009.

I reside in Dawlish Warren but am not a rabbit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well the op needs to send something else sure as eggs is eggs

if he's moved since taking this out and neither the OC nor any DCA have been informed in writing about his new address they'll go for a backdoor CCJ at the last registered one to HFC

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re-reading the Ops thread, it's an exact replica (procedure/info) and participants (cabot/ruthbridge).

 

 

My course of action will be my sending the letter back to them (taking a copy of it first) also enlcosing a stat barred letter (template from here)

+ informing them I've retained a proof of postage which 'should' leave Ruthbridge with a clear way forward on how not to proceed.

 

 

What I won't be doing is responding to anything else they may want to send but instead simply send it back 'return to sender'

 

 

Ruthbridge's letter is a little ambiguous (for fca purposes I guess) with terms such as 'to avoid any further action' quite what 'action' they can take once

the star barred letter is sent remains to be seen

I reside in Dawlish Warren but am not a rabbit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good morning again, and thank you for all the replies thus far.

 

We've done an SAR for this and also checked hubby's credit record.

 

Nothing at all on there in respect of HFC Bank, as we suspected.

 

There have been some calls on both our landline and on his mobile from Ruthbridge this past week, but of course, we've not responded - it's all been recordings, in any case, no "real" person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good morning!

 

My husband has been receiving letters from Ruthbridge (on behalf of Cabot) in respect of an alleged HFC Bank debt of over £7000.

We've checked his credit record, no evidence that he's ever done any sort of business with HFC, and he didn't even recognise "HFC Bank" in any case.

 

I suspect strongly that they are fishing for business, as the response to his SAR request was a pile of paperwork from Cabot demanding to know everything about him and wanting him to supply various documents to prove his identity to back this up before they could comply with the SAR.

 

To me, this smacks of "we don't know that you are actually the person we're looking for".

My instinct is to ignore this latest Cabot letter.

We have also written to Ruthbridge telling them to remove my husband's mobile phone number and our private landline number from their records - we didn't give these to them - as we've had a selection of those "recorded" phone calls from them during the late evenings.

 

We also think it's quite funny that, having phoned him and written to him, they then ask for his address and phone number!!!

Have we done the right things so far?

Thank you all very much.

Catherine.

Edited by Andyorch
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anything showing on his Credit Records with the CRA's? It could be a faulty trace as in any J jones will do so long as they grab the hook.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure otheres will be along soon with further advice, personally I would ignore them now but log and keep all texts and communications as if he is not the debtor, you might be able to clobber team with GDPR breach and harassment later. Might be worth a Cease and Desist stating all communications are being logged and any further calls/emails txt etc will be construed as Harassment hubby not being the named debtor, and will be reported to appropriate authorities including ICO all others will know more about that tactic.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Threads merged...please do not start multiple threads on the same issue.

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

as stated before it pointless sending an SAR to a DCA

 

just send our SB letter as advised earlier

that put the DCA in a tight spot wit regard to providing the info required

and the owness is then on them to do the running around to prove otherwise.

 

for want of info..HFC did actually do many standard bank accouts, and would certainly have NEVER let an OD get too £7k..

i will guess if anything this is a current account plus..which was actually a LOAN.

but eitherway its not his ...so tough luck cabot.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you dx - I realised a bit late that the SAR was probably not the way forward with this! I don't really want us to get into "letter ping pong", as it really isn't my husband's debt. He's never had any account with HFC. We've checked his credit record - nothing. I think we'll just let them fester for the time being. Many thanks again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

wont be on his credit record if it was defaulted more than 6yrs ago.

 

pers I would send the letter

ot wanting to get into letter tennis is a bit like shutting the gate after the horse has run down the road.

..you've already done that with the SAR

 

send the SB letter.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning, dx - should we send an SB letter even if it's not his debt anyway? The wording of the latest missive from both Ruthbridge and Cabot suggests that they actually don't know if they've got the right person - "....we need to confirm that you are the person....." This is definitely not my husband's debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning, dx - should we send an SB letter even if it's not his debt anyway? The wording of the latest missive from both Ruthbridge and Cabot suggests that they actually don't know if they've got the right person - "....we need to confirm that you are the person....." This is definitely not my husband's debt.

 

Just ignore them....if they are not sure they wont escalate it further...and definitely not if Ruthbridge are involved ( Ruthbridge are Cabots waste bin for unenforceable debts not qualifying for court claims)

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

all I was thinking was if the letter states I ack no debt etc across the top etc

 

it would put it to bed

as it appears to be troubling the OP>

 

admittance or not.. that makes no odds .. iys statute barred and they'd have to prove otherwise

and when they did, it would prove [or they would have too subsequently prove] who made the payments.

and ofcourse it would not be the OP's OH..

 

but ignoring is just as good

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fair enough, dx - what I really want to avoid is further stress on my poor hubby - he suffers chronic illness, unfortunately, and idiots like these two are things he could do without. He's happy to leave things be for now - at least the phone calls have stopped!

Link to post
Share on other sites

just remember that under the new CONC rules

once told the debt is SB, and if they agree [or cant prove otherwise] they must CEASE all comms

 

that was what I was looking at.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...