Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • and it legally informs them of your correct and current address as you must do with all old debts last paid/used in say 7 yrs you dont want backdoor CCJ's. what were the names of these IVA scammers, the one you took it out with, and the one that scammed you to let them take over please? your story is slightly worrying. dx  
    • Incidentally, congratulations on not buying the warranty. That is another Big Motoring World rip-off. See what we have to say about extended warranties and the Big Motoring World attitude to them is particularly unhelpful
    • well that google is from 2019, but the photos are certainly of someone driving on the public highway in/out by an ANP system, though the site of where the camera actually is, is not showing there are anpr cameras up by the low yellow barriers but they wont get from facing shots from there. interesting, needs to be checked if the road IS a public highway but on private land, cause as you say, if the whole area is max 4hrs , how does the hotel work< ?? must have a reg entry system.  now as for taking pictures of cars on a public highway then guessing the are parking ...erm.... i dont thnk thats right nor allowed under GDPR. dx  
    • Under the consumer rights act 2015, if a defect manifests itself within 30 days and you have a right to return the vehicle for a full refund. If any defect manifests itself within the first six months of ownership then you have a right to return the vehicle for a full refund subject to the retailers right to carry out a repair. If the retailer declines to repair or if the repair fails then you have the right to return. The problem here is that you have to assert their right. It's a bit ridiculous – but you have to do let them know preferably in writing that you are asserting your rights under the consumer rights act either the 30 day right or the six month right. I suppose that you haven't done this – which would be quite understandable because most people don't know that these rights exist and that they are subject to these conditions – the condition that the right must be inserted. It is frankly ridiculous. The dealers know it and we have lots of instances of this company delaying appointments et cetera and our strong suspicion is that they are simply trying to run their customers out of time. On the basis that you haven't asserted your rights, we now have to look to ordinary contract law. You are entitled to purchase a vehicle which is of satisfactory condition and which remains that way for a reasonable period of time. Clearly it is in satisfactory. They are blaming you. Has your independent inspection identified the reason for the defect? This will be important because as you have seen BMW are already saying it is down to your driving and you are going to have to produce evidence that it wasn't down to your driving and the you drove it absolutely reasonably and it was simply the condition of the car. Have you been without the car for any period of time. Is it driveable now? If the car was off the road for a substantial amount of time and was still off the road then you would be able to argue that this is a fundamental breach of contract and that you have been deprived of substantially the whole benefit of the contract and therefore you will be entitled to treat the contract as breached by Big Motoring World and insist on cancelling the contract. It may be that you will eventually be obliged to keep the car but have the repairs paid for. Have you had any quotations for the work that needs doing? I asked you questions about the MOT – but you haven't responded.
    • A 'violent left wing mob', comprised of a chap in a red hoody with a damp polystyrene coffee cup and a bit of wet cement, gets nowhere near cowering frightened farage some distance away on top of his double decker bus .. as farages security and support seem to film the incident grinning     Farage bravely flinches, grimaces and seems to almost burst into tears as the 'objects managed to travel a part of the way toward his position on top of his bus. His reactions honed by having a bit of milk splash him at a prior incident allow him to swiftly fall into a protective cower and grimace .. .. Sometime after, once the mob of 1 had been safely bundled away, farage apparently wipes his eyes of tears, and rising from his cowed and frightened pose, bravely shouts “I will not be bullied or cowed by a violent left-wing mob who hate our country.” .. however few they may comprise of.   https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/nigel-farage-cement-barnsley-reform-uk-b2560501.html  
  • 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 5886 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

No going back now. Just emailed WW as a courtesy prior to sending the original.

 

Dear Mr Wellinghoff,

 

please find attached my reply to your letter 26 February 2007. I shall of course send you the letter by post also, but I thought you might like an advance reading before the weekend.

 

I shall also be sending a request to each company involved requesting a copy of all the information that each company holds about me. Just a bit of advance warning to allow someone to warm up the photocopier for next week.

 

I look forward to your comments in reply.

 

Regards,

 

Seahorse

 

Just realised. Why has it taken 5 days to get to me? So much for a substantive reply early this week. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Good old Ken, he makes me chuckle. This is what he put at the end of his letter to Santa.

 

Perhaps asking Santa for things he cannot deliver is pointless, so let’s just ask for lots of debt. We know he can give us that!

 

So much for a caring company that just understands its customers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish I'd seen this one earlier. I could have included it. Maybe not to late to pop it in the postal version though. From our Ken's fair pen in September last year...

 

Once debt has been acquired, then the debt purchaser needs an efficient tracing process which takes due regard of the legislation surrounding personal data while verifying information to remove mistakes. Section 55 of the Data Protection Act 1998, makes it an offence to buy and sell personal data without the consent of the data subject. Currently, the unlawful procurement or sale of confidential personal information often results in a fine or conditional discharge, but a recent report published by the UK Information Commissioner, which is responsible for the regulation and enforcement of the Data Protection Act, calls for prison sentences for up to two years for illegal trade in personal data.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Seahorse just catching up with your thread...it sure has moved on from a couple of days ago.

This rights and duties bit is quite a contentious point. So what they are saying is that they have the rights to the debt, the rights to the data but none of the duties like sending you regular statements or arranging more lending etc. That's a fantastic deal isn't it. Access to an amount of money but absolutely no boring stuff to get in the way of both staff and profit margins.

But surely these rights only exist in law if there is a properly executed credit agreement (not the application form as confirmed by the DTi) AND if such a document exists (which seems to be increasingly dubious )you agreed for the balance and the data to be handed to a third party i.e. Cabot or whatever they are calling themselves today. However in the absence of such an agreement they don't really have anythingat all and Barclaycard has sold them a lemon as they didn't have the docs and they never saw any docs at the time of sale as you rightly said they bought a load of debts en bloc, details unseen.

As to the CRAs. If someone can point me to any Act of Parliament which gives these odious creeps legal status I'll be very obliged.

You are perfectly entitled to tell them all to stop processing your personal data under S10 of the DPA and I still believe there must be a good Human Rights angle here (S8 HRA).

Beggars belief the whole thing. Keep the pressure up.:grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, unless WW can come up with a little more entertainment, I think my next reply will be along the lines of, I'll only deal with the company who owns the debt, so CF(Europe) can whistle. And by the way, see you in court IF you've got the bottle.

 

But you never know... maybe there's more fun and games to come :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seahorse - that's a really good reply - let's see what sense you get from WW - seems like he will have is work cut out for him in having to cook up some better excuses??

I do agree with Rhia - seems these companies want it all their own way -

have cake and eat it?

 

Seahorse - keep on at them as something will give way somewhere :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Seahorse

 

I have just looked in on your thread and have read the latest fairy story that WW has sent you. It just beggars belief to be honest!!:eek:

 

If you haven't sent your reply to this already, perhaps you could show a little compassion to the poor man and point out the obvious gap in his legal education regarding the CCA by including the following definition of a 'creditor' under the CCA:

“creditor” means the person providing credit under a consumer credit agreement or the person to whom his rights and duties under the agreement have passed by assignment or operation of law, and in relation to a prospective consumer credit agreement, includes the prospective creditor;

 

After all, WW mentions the assignment of the debt from B/Card to Cabot.

 

Do they really think that they can purchase a debt, assert that they have acquired rights under the 'alleged' credit agreement by virtue of assignment, but at the same time deny that this assignment now makes them the creditor and thus imposes on them the duties of the creditor as well???

 

What planet are they on??

 

P.S - where on earth does he get his 'legal duty to provide info. to CRA's' idea from? This is a commercial and reciprocal arrangement between an individual company and the CRA - some companies do share info. some don't. It is entirely voluntary, not compulsory!!:rolleyes:

 

Regards, Pam

VITAL - IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE ABOUT THE INCREASED BAILIFFS' POWERS TO BREAK INTO YOUR HOME AND USE FORCE IN ORDER TO GET YOUR GOODS THEN JOIN THE PETITION HERE:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....l#post53879 9

 

Anyone seeing this who wants to help by copying it to their signature please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Pam, I've included that as I've had time to reflect before heading off to the post office, so I've done a bit of digging. I've also amended part of it where they think they don't need my consent to share my data. This in response to Liz pointing me in the direction of this...

 

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/practical_application/credit_%20agreements%20-%20data_%20sharing.pdf

 

My amendment taking that into account is...

 

You note that I am concerned that Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited has no legal right to share my data. This remains my belief, and nothing that you have said causes me to change my mind regarding this. I have AT NO TIME authorised Barclaycard or any company within the Cabot Financial Group of Companies to share or otherwise process my personal data. You mention that in particular paragraph 6 of Schedule 2, permits disclosure of such information to and by credit reference agencies without the customers’ consent. I am afraid that I make a totally different interpretation of that paragraph, which states

 

“6. - (1) The processing is necessary for the purposes of legitimate interests pursued by the data controller or by the third party or parties to whom the data are disclosed, except where the processing is unwarranted in any particular case by reason of prejudice to the rights and freedoms or legitimate interests of the data subject.

 

(2) The Secretary of State may by order specify particular circumstances in which this condition is, or is not, to be taken to be satisfied. “

 

I believe that you may be relying on information from the Information Commissioner’s office, in a communication dated 6 November 2006, where that Office supports the view that information may be shared with credit reference agencies without the consent of the data subject. However, this is based on the assumption that the data shared is accurate, and that the body sharing the data has a right to the data in the first place. Cabot Financial (UK) Limited fails at this point for a number of reasons; it is NOT entitled to hold my data, as I have never consented to ANY party, including Barclaycard, to share my data and, Cabot Financial (UK) Limited, formerly Kings Hill (No 1) Limited do not hold any data apparently. Notwithstanding the fact that the alleged debt to which this data refers is in dispute in any case. And I must emphasise this point once more: Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited do not have my consent either to hold or process my data.

 

I would also like to draw your attention to a communication written by Mr Maynard available on your website which states,

 

“Once debt has been acquired, then the debt purchaser needs an efficient tracing process which takes due regard of the legislation surrounding personal data while verifying information to remove mistakes. Section 55 of the Data Protection Act 1998, makes it an offence to buy and sell personal data without the consent of the data subject. Currently, the unlawful procurement or sale of confidential personal information often results in a fine or conditional discharge, but a recent report published by the UK Information Commissioner, which is responsible for the regulation and enforcement of the Data Protection Act, calls for prison sentences for up to two years for illegal trade in personal data.”

 

So it would appear that Mr Maynard himself is aware of the implications of breaching the Data Protection Act. I would respectfully suggest that you acquaint yourself with that Act yourself, rather than attempting to justify the actions of your company by apparently twisting the Act to suit your own version of how it should be interpreted.

Oh, heck. This is addictive, and more fun that covering myself in jam and running around naked in a room full of wasps. :D
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is entirely voluntary, not compulsory!!:rolleyes:

 

Regards, Pam

 

Which reminds me of a story. One of our boats was working down Trinidad way. When it was time for a crew change, one of the lads decided it would be cheaper for our company to send him to Tobago for two weeks all expenses paid in a hotel, rather than sending him back home, then back out to Trinidad. So he got himself all comfortable in the hotel, hitting the bar for breakfast, and leaving at bedtime. After a few days of this, he was approached by the manager, who said: "Sir, the drinks are complimentary, not compulsory."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Pam, I've included that as I've had time to reflect before heading off to the post office, so I've done a bit of digging. I've also amended part of it where they think they don't need my consent to share my data. This in response to Liz pointing me in the direction of this...

 

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/practical_application/credit_%20agreements%20-%20data_%20sharing.pdf

 

My amendment taking that into account is...

 

Oh, heck. This is addictive, and more fun that covering myself in jam and running around naked in a room full of wasps. :D

 

Very good response... Can't wait to see what they say for themselves...

Remember if you find anything I say helpful, please click the scales

 

 

tbern123 vs Cabot

  1. Cabot again !!! Urgent Help Needed
  2. Litigation - tbern123 V Cabot Financial (Uk) Limited
  3. No more calls from Cabot... lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good response... Can't wait to see what they say for themselves...

 

Well, you'll just have to be patient a little longer. My pal WW appears to leave his letters lying around on is desk for a while before popping them in the post; 5 days between the date on the last letter, and it being shoved through my door. Make of that what you will. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seahorse, I am following your thread with interest-the more so since you

printed Cabots' amazing response to your queries. For a Compliance officer to

put such statements in writing is surprising to say the least. He has misread

you totally, as he appears to think that he can get away with apparently

misleading answers satisfying you. One would assume that whoever else is

monitoring this site, it seems Cabot is not one of them.

 

Had the letter been written by the office boy, one could mske allowances for

the "inaccuracies". As it is, I would be inclined to draw the attention of

Trading Standards to the letter. Either a senior officer in the organisation is

so uninformed on the workings of the Consumer Credit Act [for which they

have a licence and should be aware] or it was a deliberate attempt to mislead

and/or deceive you.

Bear in mind that this is a company that is permitted to process ones data

[ok, not yours SH :p] . And under the DPA, deceiving or misleading the data subject are two major criteria in deciding that data has been unlawfully or

unfairly processed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seahorse, I am following your thread with interest-the more so since you

printed Cabots' amazing response to your queries. For a Compliance officer to

put such statements in writing is surprising to say the least. He has misread

you totally, as he appears to think that he can get away with apparently

misleading answers satisfying you. One would assume that whoever else is

monitoring this site, it seems Cabot is not one of them.

 

I wouldn't be so sure. If I thought nobody was watching, most of the fun would go out of this.

 

Either a senior officer in the organisation is so uninformed on the workings of the Consumer Credit Act [for which they have a licence and should be aware] or it was a deliberate attempt to mislead and/or deceive you.
HEAD of compliance. No more miserable Legal Counsel for our friend WW.

 

Heads or tails????? :razz:

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, been having a think and want to float a scenario past you lot.

 

Card company sells debt to Debt Purchasing Company.

 

DPC writes to debtor demanding outstanding amount due to CC.

 

Debtor say, p*ss off, I'm going to chase CC for unlawful charges. Discovers CC ows debtor £XXX more than alleged outstanding amount.

 

Debtor demands £xxx from CC.

 

CC says, not our problem any more, chase DPC for money.

 

Questions: is this a likely scenario? is CC still legally liable to cough up?

 

And if not, how p*ssed off will DPC be when they get a demand for £xxx, as they are actually owners of an account, and not a debt?

 

???????

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, been having a think and want to float a scenario past you lot.

 

Card company sells debt to Debt Purchasing Company.

 

DPC writes to debtor demanding outstanding amount due to CC.

 

Debtor say, p*ss off, I'm going to chase CC for unlawful charges. Discovers CC ows debtor £XXX more than alleged outstanding amount.

 

Debtor demands £xxx from CC.

 

CC says, not our problem any more, chase DPC for money.

 

Questions: is this a likely scenario? is CC still legally liable to cough up?

 

And if not, how p*ssed off will DPC be when they get a demand for £xxx, as they are actually owners of an account, and not a debt?

 

???????

 

From my experiance to date the CC always take ownership and pay up. Not sure what would happen if they were alerted to "who the creditor" actually is.

 

would be REALLY funny if the DCA has to start paying out as they are "The creditor".

If I have helped click my scales....

 

Find my threads by clicking here

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wondered, as on another forum, someone tried to take Citicard to court for unlawful charges, and Citicard's defence was, It's nuffin to do wiv us any more Guvnor. We've sold it on. Case dismissed.

 

In fact, I've just had a rather evil thought. How about I SAR KH/CF(UK), demanding statements, and run them through the chase for unlawful charges scenario. Should prove an interesting exercise. They are, after all, the owners of the account, so should surely accept that they are liable to pay up if it transpires THEY owe ME money. Perhaps they would have to call in a Barclaycard employee as an expert witness to justify the charges in their own defence.

 

Oh, Gawd, I'm having a giggling fit. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seahorse, I had a Citifinancial Credit Card £900 on it when it was sold to Kingshill No1 Ltd (Cabot) . I SAR'd Citi and found over £1000 in charges so claimed them back from Citi. To date ( & it ain't over yet :D ) Citi wrote and told me they had deducted the difference between £25 charged and the £12 so called FSA recommended charge and refunded me £500 - Well, not me actually - they sent it to Cabot because they now 'own' the debt.

 

I am about to write to Citi requesting the full charges back and writing to Cabot asking them for various denominations I made to them at the time following their harrassing phone calls. I also had a default registered and not removed by Citi and Kingshill No1 Ltd registering a default the day they bought the debt.

 

There will be a claim for non default removal and additional costs of finance from Citi and a claim on Cabot for registering a default without proper paperwork or knowledge that the debt was due because they never responded to my CCa request.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...