Cabot/morgan - cap1 card CCJ & AOE payments- admit they were wrong - offered £150!

[Guest DisgruntledDebtGuy]

Yeah apparently so, although I've been made aware of a law they're not allowed to pretend to be another company to trick someone or something along these lines.

 

The card was my first ever debt. I was unemployed and applied for £250.

 

Around 20+ payday loans in the following years (I'm one of those guys) many of which I lost track of a long time ago often being sold, repented by 2/3 other companies, am currently trying to work through any still active.

[dx100uk]

50 minutes ago, DisgruntledDebtGuy said:

Yeah apparently so, although I've been made aware of a law they're not allowed to pretend to be another company to trick someone or something along these lines.

 

the Law of properties Act covers debt assignment and that's always been the same.

no-one in your case pretended to be another company anyway..

Cabot purchased the debt,

 

the fact that you either ignored or didn't see the numerous letters from both the debt buyer and the court, explaining the course of events that led to the CCJ or your poor understanding or belief in what might have been happening being true or legal is not any excuse after the events...

 

however it's all pretty immaterial as the CCJ does not exist anymore and cabot held their hands up to that.

 

To a degree there could have been a case of irresponsible lending toward cap1 by upping the credit limit and additionally allowing further lending sums (twice?) , but what would you actually achieve, financial wise I suspect very little in one form or an other, and this is confirmed by the FOS not pushing it.

 

now to what extent this card debt actually caused your latter issues, to me, is somewhat debateable, as so ...are cabot responsible for your latter issues...again I don't think it holds much water.

 

you've fired bullets in every direct and although the scattergun approach is never the best action, the wide nd varied targets would have gotten you some traction i'm sure if there was something more to grab.

 

PDL IRL's en-masse might be a good thing..

 

dx

 

 

 

[Guest DisgruntledDebtGuy]

Cabot have provided this letter as apparent NOA along with a differently dated Cabot booklet.

Capital One did not send it and have confirmed they 'unfortunately would not notify me of the debt sale'.

Cabot used a 3rd party printing company to produce and send.

 

Yes I messed up with the Court and learnt my lesson.

I have been in close contact with the office staff throughout and recently apologised for extra work created and thanked their help.

 

Cap1 investigated the irresponsible lending, found nothing and gave full written permission for the Ombudsman.

The investigator himself stated that consent had been given and after 66 months Cap1 advised they may not now allow this permission due to 6 months passing.

 

Cap1 then requested the 6 year rule be applied and they agreed, citing the rule in the FCA book, although I maintain that the rule also relates to them giving permission outside of this period which cannot be withdrawn.

The fos advised 'I should have known I'd been Irresponsibly lent to earlier', within the 6 years.

 

Cabot are certainly responsible for a number of issues this last 2 years but obviously not entirely measureable with regards to money. Not fussed about money.

 

The scattergun approach was not intentional, rather aa snowball effect of me investigating further, getting data from different companies, learning more, etc

 

C1 rejected my original irresponsible lending as my application form showed I was earning £50,000 a year while unemployed (certainly not entered myself)

[dx100uk]

that NOE is OK

and it's ok to come from cabot the debt buyer upon their behalf.

 

the fact that the form showed £xxk earnings is nothing cap1 can check other than a cursory cra file check.

so unusable as a basic of IRL..

 

 

 

 

[Guest DisgruntledDebtGuy]

Thanks really appreciate your comments.

 

It was my first credit, they claim to have checked a current account in good order and the £50k income in deciding.

The limit was raised to £1600 without request or option to refuse.

 

When my mother paid it off we cried/begged for account closure.

This is not in the notes although something like 'zero income, mother has paid off and cut up card'

- I called once to query PPI thinking the account is closed.

 

Then sent promotional material for account upgrades etc in the post 8months later,

tick the box to return and eventually request a new card, all gambled again in days.

 

FOS took the complaint relating to this as me just ringing for a new card which they found nothing wrong.

 

[dx100uk]

but they can't check income and they most certainly can't see your bank statements.

just the fact that the A/C had money in it at the time of approval when you originally applied for the account.

 

they would not have issued a new card, but a replacement one, just like when one expires, the account is the same, just a differing card number.

a consumer closes an a/c by cutting up the existing card and clearing a balance, the financial relation still exists as does them offering further credit.

 

there is no remit to prevent them sending credit offers to old new or existing customers, after all. they are in the business of lending money

an existing relationship would not necessitate a further credit check.

 

however, as I said earlier, if in your sar to cap1, it shows they did do a credit search, and/or you have proof from your credit file a search was made by them ...

and at that point, you still had existing defaults and many open PDL a/c's then that could be a new complaint, which could then be latterly escalated to the FOS after 8 weeks, but what you'd get is another matter, at best an acknowledgement that they should not have lent to you, but then it's back to cabot and the game of proving consequential losses due to the CCJ that should never have happened. 

[Guest DisgruntledDebtGuy]

Yes indeed, some of the fos responses have claimed they see no reason why they would x/y/z...and I have responded multiple times that they are a credit company and that's their business, maybe that's the reason?

 

I am not entirely sure about a credit check, it is something I have requested specifically in the past and not fulfilled, I'll have to inspect the SAR further.

The fos are not dealing with me anymore and have closed any outstanding complaints without further investigation, which I am comfortable with.

 

 

[Durkin]

Finally had a chance to read all this.

 

A CCJ stopping you getting a home is similar to my experience.  Not great.

 

Do you still have any other CCJs or defaults?  It only takes one to stop you.

 

Hope you get settled soon.

 

Rico.