Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I see jenrick has stuck his head up with them, and I'm sure this wont faze their nasty rhetoric one wit-less UK growth since 2010 has been lacklustre and largely driven by immigration, says report UK growth since 2010 has been lacklustre and largely driven by immigration, says report | Economic growth (GDP) | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Resolution Foundation report suggests parties are dodging the economic challenges facing the country   Net migration is more than two and a half times the 2010 figure despite a string of Tory pledges to reduce it Immigration: how 14 years of Tory rule have changed Britain – in charts | General election 2024 | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Net migration is more than two and a half times the 2010 figure despite a string of Tory pledges to reduce it    
    • Will get them done asap My job changes week to week so at the time I didn’t know. 
    • You will probably get a couple more reminders followed by further demands fro unregulated debt collectors with even increasing amounts to pay. They are all designed to scare you into paying.  Don't. It's a scam site and they do not know who was driving and they know the keeper is not liable to pay the PCN. Also the shop was closed so they have no legitimate interest in keeping the car park clear. So to charge £100 is a penalty as there is no legitimate interest which means that the case would be thrown out if it went to Court.  Keep your money in your wallet and be prepared to ignore all their letters and threats. Doubtful they would go to Court since a lot more people would not pay when they heard  MET lost in Court. However they may just send you a Letter of Claim to test your resolve.  If yoy get one of those, come back to us and we will advise a snotty letter to send them.  You probably already have, but take a look through some of our past Met PCNs to see how they are doing.
    • Hello, been a while since I posted on here, really hoping for the same support an advice I received last time :-) Long, long story for us, but basically through bad choices, bad luck and bad advice ended up in an IVA in 2016. The accounts involved all defaulted, to be expected. In 2018, I got contacted by an 'independent advisor' advising me that I shouldn't be in an IVA, that it wasn't the solution for our circumstances and that they would guide us through the process of leaving the IVA and finding a better solution. I feel very stupid for taking this persons advice, and feel they prey on vulnerable people for their own financial gain (it ended with us paying our IVA monthly contribution to them)-long and short of it our IVA failed in 2018. At the same time the IVA failed we also had our shared ownership property voluntarily repossessed (to say this was an incredibly stressful time would be an understatement!) When we moved to our new (rented) property in August 2018, I was aware that creditors would start contacting us from the IVA failure. I got advice from another help website and started sending off SARs and CCAs request letters. I was advised not to bury my head and update our address etc and tackle each company as they came along. Initially there was quite a lot of correspondence, and I still get a daily missed call from PRA group (and the occasional letter from them), but not much else. However, yesterday i had a letter through from Lowell (and one from Capital One) advising that they had bought my debt and would like to speak with me regarding the account. There will be several.of these through our door i suspect, as we did have several accounts with Capital One. Capital One have written to us with regular statements over the last 5 years, and my last communication with them was to advise of of our new address (June 2019), I also note that all of these accounts received a small payment in Jan2019 (i'm assuming the funds from the failed IVA pot). Really sorry for the long long post, but just thought id give (some of) the background for context.... I guess my question at the moment is.....how do I respond to Lowell...do I wait for the inevitable other letters to arrive then deal with them all together or individually...? Do I send them a CCA?  Many thanks
    • hi all just got the reminder letter, I have attached it and also the 2nd side of the original 1st pcn (i just saw the edit above) Look forward to your advice Thanks   PCN final reminder.pdf pcn original side 2.pdf
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 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
      • 161 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
  • Recommended Topics

Seahorse v Cabot


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5885 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

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I had a moan at Barclaycard a few weeks ago too. Complained about them selling a debt on that was just fairy stories, only saying they had 6 years worth of statements and nothing else when they somehow managed to send Cabot an application form, no proof of how they arrived at the default amount they did, etc, etc.

 

So, letter in this morning saying they can't give a full response yet, but wish to resolve the dispute as swiftly as possible, and I should hear by the 10th of December.

 

Doesn't sound very swift to me. But I'll wait to see what they say before I report THEM to the ICO as well.

 

Their letter wouldn't have been prompted by my Cabot complaints recently, by any chance????? Might they have been in touch with them recently? Time to SAR Cabot again, I think :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Their letter wouldn't have been prompted by my Cabot complaints recently, by any chance????? Might they have been in touch with them recently? Time to S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Cabot again, I think :D

 

 

:D You should know by now that they get CFC withdrawal symptoms if they don't hear from you!! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Awww, poor ickle diddims. Still, if they do, they could always try writing to me. That would prompt a response from me.

 

After I'd picked myself up off the floor, that is. I get the impression they wish the CFC would just go away ;)

 

Never mind. They should have the CSA's inquiry by now. CSA wrote to tell me they've been in touch. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I didn't expect a reply so quickly from Barclaycard. But one came today. :D

 

Unfortunately, it's to say that "my correspondance has becpme detached from my complaint". Eh? WTF does that mean? I hope it doesn't mean they've dumped my personal info in a bin and accidentally left it out to be picked over by Identity Thieves. I'll know who to blame if someone buys a house in my name.

 

On second thoughts, that's not very likely. Not since Cabot and RBS have conspired to make me uncreditworthy. :lol:

 

But anyway, looks like I'll have to send all my stuff off to them again. With a stern warning that a complaint to the FOS and ICO won't be far behind if they don't get their overpaid backsides in gear. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I didn't expect a reply so quickly from Barclaycard. But one came today. :D

 

Unfortunately, it's to say that "my correspondance has becpme detached from my complaint". Eh? WTF does that mean? I hope it doesn't mean they've dumped my personal info in a bin and accidentally left it out to be picked over by Identity Thieves. I'll know who to blame if someone buys a house in my name.

 

On second thoughts, that's not very likely. Not since Cabot and RBS have conspired to make me uncreditworthy. :lol:

 

But anyway, looks like I'll have to send all my stuff off to them again. With a stern warning that a complaint to the FOS and Information Commissioners Office won't be far behind if they don't get their overpaid backsides in gear. ;)

 

 

me thinks a little compensation is in order

 

compensation.jpg have you got any carrier pigeons ???

 

can i sneak this thread in

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/cooperative-bank/89128-mcuth-co-op-pii.html

:cool: sunbathing in juan les pins de temps en temps

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to be quite typical Theo. Cabot never seem to admit they are in the wrong. So eventually it reaches the stage that you can probably forget about them, as they know they won't win in court. Or if their actions are hurting you, such as by their reporting a default where none exists, it seems you need to exhaust their complaints procedure, followed by reporting them where approriate. I'm at that stage, and hoping to avoid having to take them to court. But I suspect that is what it will take.

 

Welcome to the Club, by the way. Nice to have you on board. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
I like it. Don't pull any punches then SH. LOL

 

He's one of the original Cabot Fan Club - we don't and never will - I think the DCA's are actually beginning to understand that now. :D

 

Seahorse is a Trojan Horse really and they'd better believe it ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

He's one of the original Cabot Fan Club - we don't and never will - I think the DCA's are actually beginning to understand that now. :D

 

Seahorse is a Trojan Horse really and they'd better believe it ;)

 

One wonders just how much Cabot would like to know who the original members are lol - From small seeds do great things grow ;-)

Just hate every DCA out there

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Similar. But if at all possible, even twistier. Cabot may buy with one company and collect with another. But at least they don't go around trying to conceal their place of business, or whatever it is Arrow hope to achieve with their obfuscation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have looked into the way that data controllers have to register themselves and have indicated on another thread that they may be forced to do business this way. When these companies register as data controllers they have to state that they will process data to 'purchase debt' and to 'collect debt on behalf of a third party'. I do not think they can process data to collect data they have purchased themselves.

I got this from the IC website. If this is true is it something we can use to our advantage? Or is it something we are ignoring?

 

Newborn

  • Haha 1

Beaten:

RBS: £4,500

AMEX: £4,200

Barclaycard Visa: £12,100

Barclaycard M/Card: £12,600

(Including the numerous DCAs they have set on me.)

PPI reclaims (into my bank account): £25,000

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have looked into the way that data controllers have to register themselves and have indicated on another thread that they may be forced to do business this way. When these companies register as data controllers they have to state that they will process data to 'purchase debt' and to 'collect debt on behalf of a third party'. I do not think they can process data to collect data they have purchased themselves.

I got this from the Information Commissioner website. If this is true is it something we can use to our advantage? Or is it something we are ignoring?

 

Newborn

 

In which way would you envisage us using this to our advantage? More minds the merrier ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...