Seahorse v Cabot

[Seahorse]

Yes, but the figure on my file remains the same as when BC sold my account to Cabot. Doesn't mean that Cabot paid anything like that amount for it, and I guess the principal is the same.

[andrew1]

Yes, but the figure on my file remains the same as when BC sold my account to Cabot. Doesn't mean that Cabot paid anything like that amount for it, and I guess the principal is the same.

 

Sorry Seahorse, I meant that my credit file reduced by the amount that Citi paid Cabot out of my charges, not by what Cabot paid Citi to buy my debt.

[Rhia]

Do what I've done. The Credit Card issuer has admited they owe me a refund of penalties and it's a tidy sum. BUT they have handed it all over to you know who who wil have paid a few hundred at most for the account.

So this is quite simple to me.

Pursue the original lender through the county court and also make sure you ask for disclosure of exactly what the DCA paid for this. They will have to tell you in court. If the original lender hadn't levied these charges I wouldn't have had such difficulties in the first place and, it is arguable, no default.

You should get your costs back and add an amount for your time, letters etc.

I am not messing about with these people any more. They have all of them made my life hell when i needed assistance and I won't forget it. Bank Fodder posted recently and said we were all messing about. 40 days, letter before action and then court. And it really is that simple.

Andrew1 bit tied up this morning but will PM you later but I think your Citi account is even more straightforward as it's ALL penalties. Ask for them back AND default removal and if they don't comply. Sue their asses off.

Boudicea will now gallop off on her chariot....

[andrew1]

Thanks Rhia.. off you trot !

[tbern123]

Thanks Rhia.. off you trot !

 

ride'em cowgirl

[Seahorse]

All this waiting means no news to post. I'm getting bored.

 

Hurry up and reply, Cabot.

[pmhcfc]

All this waiting means no news to post. I'm getting bored.

 

Hurry up and reply, Cabot.

 

SH, are you feeling alright? How long has it been since you had anything to report on Cabot V's you ?? yOure not going all soft are you lol

[elizabeth1]

All this waiting means no news to post. I'm getting bored.

 

Hurry up and reply, Cabot.

 

Hey don't worry !!!

 

They are probably trying to count how much they are going to pay you to go away and annoy someone else!!!

[Seahorse]

Hey don't worry !!!

 

They are probably trying to count how much they are going to pay you to go away and annoy someone else!!!

 

Wouldn't THAT be good.

 

I rather think they're covering their eyes up whenever a letter or email from me hits them, and going "LA, LA, LA. We can't see you."

[Seahorse]

Hooray!!!!! A letter!!!!! (Looks like WW handles SAR's too. I wonder if he makes the tea as well?)

 

Dear Mr Seahorse

 

SUBJECT ACCESS REQUEST

 

Thank you for your letters requesting a file in relation to your personal data.

 

We are currently compiling a full file on all the data that Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited holds on you. You should receive the full file within 40 working days.

 

The enclosed cheque payable to Cabot Financial (UK) Limited is being returned as Cabot Financial (UK) Limited does not hold any data on you.

 

We do recommend though that you make a similar request with the creditor, Barclaycard, who may hold information on you which we may not have.

 

We thank you for your co-operation in this matter.

 

Yours Sincerely

 

Willem Wellinghoff

 

Nice to have it confirmed yet again that (UK) does not hold the data that they share with (Europe) and the CRAs.

 

BUT. They recommend I SAR Barclaycard? Well,, that's been done. Twice, as the first one seemed to disappear into thin air. (Hmmmm) But, they refer to BC as the creditor? When did that happen? Surely Cabot Financial (UK) Limited are the creditor? Is he somewhat subtly trying to tell me something??????

[pmhcfc]

Hooray!!!!! A letter!!!!! (Looks like WW handles SAR's too. I wonder if he makes the tea as well?)

 

 

 

Nice to have it confirmed yet again that (UK) does not hold the data that they share with (Europe) and the CRAs.

 

BUT. They recommend I SAR Barclaycard? Well,, that's been done. Twice, as the first one seemed to disappear into thin air. (Hmmmm) But, they refer to BC as the creditor? When did that happen? Surely Cabot Financial (UK) Limited are the creditor? Is he somewhat subtly trying to tell me something??????

 

Hmmm...So Cabot UK doesn't hold any data on you, yet Europe do, yet cabot uk bought the debt and europe are collecting it...So how did europe get any date on you-- They have to be careful. they're going to disappear up their own backside soon.

[Seahorse]

Just been moaning to Experian...

 

OK, let's stop being silly right now.

 

Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited have nothing to do with the entry on my file. They are a totally separate LIMITED company within the Cabot Group of Companies, and DO NOT OWN MY ACCOUNT. So there is no point in me writing to them, as they are legally only collecting agents working on behalf of Cabot Financial (UK) Limited.

 

Kings Hill (No 1) Limited EXISTS ONLY AS A DORMANT COMPANY. So all this nonsense about them confirming the information they have registered is correct is, in my mind, the sort of rubbish that appears in children's fairy stories. The OWNER of the account is CABOT FINANCIAL (UK) LIMITED. (I'm sure you can spot the subtle differences in names. My dog certainly seemed to have no problem.)

 

OK, now we get down to the nitty gritty. I'm sure that you will agree that a company that purports to hold no data about me, would then have no data to share with a company such as yours. And as Kings Hill (No 1) Limited are now Cabot Financial (UK) Limited as of 15th January 2007, they are in effect, one and the same.

 

So I am asking you to confirm in your own mind whether or not, if a company holds no data, and therefore has no data to pass to your company, then no default should be registered on the file.

 

Therefore, if said company confirms IN WRITING that they hold no data, then that default should not exist.

 

OK then. This should make things simple for you. Here is a letter received by me this morning confirming the above.

 

" Dear Mr Seahorse

 

SUBJECT ACCESS REQUEST

 

Thank you for your letters requesting a file in relation to your personal data.

 

We are currently compiling a full file on all the data that Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited holds on you. You should receive the full file within 40 working days.

 

The enclosed cheque payable to Cabot Financial (UK) Limited is being returned as Cabot Financial (UK) Limited does not hold any data on you.

 

We do recommend though that you make a similar request with the creditor, Barclaycard, who may hold information on you which we may not have.

 

We thank you for your co-operation in this matter.

 

Yours Sincerely

 

Willem Wellinghoff"

 

Now get your finger out, and start acting in a responsible manner, and please delete the entry from my file until such time as the default can be proved to be accurate. Remember, YOU have as much of a duty to comply with the Data Protection Act as anyone else, and I have now confirmed to you that the entry you hold is unlawful.

 

Failure to comply will mean that I will escalate this into a formal complaint to the Information Commissioner's Office regarding your obstructive and unhelpful replies to my complaint to you.

 

Your Sincerely,

 

Seahorse

 

----- Original Message ----- From: "CreditExpert"

To:

Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 11:03 AM

Subject: EMR1666781X

 

> Our Ref: AIH/XXXXXXXX/PC

>

> Dear Mr Seahorse

>

> Thank you for your email, which we received on 01 March 2007.

>

> Further to our recent correspondence, I have been contacted by Kings Hill (No 1) Ltd. They have confirmed that the details we hold are accurate and have requested that we retain the information on our database. Unfortunately I am unable to amend this information without the authorisation of the company in question. If you have any further queries or wish to discuss this further, may I suggest you contact the company concerned direct at the following address:

>

> Cabot Financial (Europe) Ltd: PO Box 241, West Malling, ME19 4NA

>

> The 'Notice of Dispute' will remain on your report for 28 days it will then be removed, unless I receive further notification from you:

>

> "THE ACCURACY OF THIS DATA HAS BEEN DISPUTED BY THE INDIVIDUAL CONCERNED AND WE HAVE NOW CONTACTED THE SUBSCRIBER. CARE SHOULD THEREFORE BE TAKEN WHEN USING THIS ITEM OF DATA TO ASSESS THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE INDIVIDUAL CONCERNED".

>

> You may be aware that you are able to add a short explanatory statement, called a 'Notice of Correction', to your credit report. If you wish to add such a statement, anyone searching your details in the future, as well as companies who have searched the report in the past six months, will see a copy of it and it may have an effect on any future applications you make.

>

> If you would like to add a Notice of Correction to your file, please provide the exact wording you wish to use. Please bear in mind that we are unable to add a statement of more than 200 words or one we think is defamatory, frivolous, scandalous or unsuitable for publication for some other reason.

>

> Kind regards

>

>

>

> Mr Alan I Hirst (AIH)

> Consumer Services Officer

> CreditExpert

[Rhia]

These people have no legal right to publish your personal details. Look at Surlybonds thread to remove a default.

This whole issue is much, much bigger than just an outstanding debt there are massive issues with regard to personal data and human rights. It is quite astounding. Ask these people to point you to the Act of Parliament which gives them the authority to collect and publish your personal data. There isn't one. They are just a commercial operation whose clients are the banks and now it seems the DCAs and in the case of Cabot they are claiming no rights etc but at the same time using the rights to register defaults.

I bet if you issue an N1 they will remove it.

[pmhcfc]

Hmm...Just a thought here..Says on Cabot's website that it can arrange loans re payments of debts..If you took them up on this offer, I wonder which company would actually be giving you the loan...Sorry Seahorse, couldn't think where else to post this question.

[Guest ian cognito]

These people have no legal right to publish your personal details. Look at Surlybonds thread to remove a default.

 

Theres been a lot of water under the bridge since this one, in my opinion, Surlybonds got in 'early' and the relative companies didn't know how to react, this was closely follwed by some 'easy' success where not only default removal was achieved, but compensation too, since then the CRA's, the ICO and the companies concernced - having been prewarned of a possibly revolt, have got their 'act together' and now prepared 'facts' to thwart these attempts to have defaults removed.

 

If you can dispute the actual default, i.e. with bank charges or some mismanagement of a contract or account, you have a good case but the default needs to be included with any court action, if you've not, you're gonna have hell of a job convincing anybody there no legislation and they have no right to process, they've closed ranks without doubt.

 

A judge may agree with you, but then again we have at least one case where a judge didn't really have much of a clue about the DPA and so came out on the side of the 'big boys' and be in no doubt, the ICO are not on our side in this one.

[andrew1]

Our Ref: AIH/XXXXXXXX/PC

>

> Dear Mr Seahorse

>

> Thank you for your email, which we received on 01 March 2007.

>

> Further to our recent correspondence, I have been contacted by Kings Hill (No 1) Ltd. How could Kingshill No1 Ltd be contacted in March 2207 - a)the Name Kingshill No1 Ltd is Dormant b) Who have they contacted ? No one from "Kingshill" EVER replied to any of the account holders who wrote to them They have confirmed that the details we hold are accurate and have requested that we retain the information on our database. Unfortunately I am unable to amend this information without the authorisation of the company in question. This just confirms that Creditexpert are not treating the data as YOURS, they are only prepared to change it with the permission of their paymasters. If you have any further queries or wish to discuss this further, may I suggest you contact the company concerned direct at the following address:

>

> Cabot Financial (Europe) Ltd: PO Box 241, West Malling, ME19 4NA Why should anyone write to another company altogether? and are Creditexpert (Like that word 'expert'!) not doubly confirming that data is being passed on illegally by them to a third party?

>

> The 'Notice of Dispute' will remain on your report for 28 days it will then be removed, unless I receive further notification from you:

>

> "THE ACCURACY OF THIS DATA HAS BEEN DISPUTED BY THE INDIVIDUAL CONCERNED AND WE HAVE NOW CONTACTED THE SUBSCRIBER. CARE SHOULD THEREFORE BE TAKEN WHEN USING THIS ITEM OF DATA TO ASSESS THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE INDIVIDUAL CONCERNED".

>

> You may be aware that you are able to add a short explanatory statement, called a 'Notice of Correction', to your credit report. If you wish to add such a statement, anyone searching your details in the future, as well as companies who have searched the report in the past six months, will see a copy of it and it may have an effect on any future applications you make.

>

> If you would like to add a Notice of Correction to your file, please provide the exact wording you wish to use. Please bear in mind that we are unable to add a statement of more than 200 words or one we think is defamatory, frivolous, scandalous or unsuitable for publication for some other reason.

>

> Kind regards

>

>

>

> Mr Alan I Hirst (AIH)

> Consumer Services Officer

> CreditExpert

 

 

Me thinks Rhia, Bankfodder and a whole lot more of us are spinning these companies up in their own webs and we should get on as BF said, with nailing them.

[Seahorse]

I have absolutely no doubt that my latest missive will have no effect whatsoever as regards the removal of the default.

 

However, batting emails backwards and forwards does tend to throw interesting snippets into the mix that might otherwise be missing in more formal communication. ie by letter. And provides valuable information when this goes to court. Just waiting for my SAR to be complied with (see above), and I should have enough to get a case together.

 

I'm under no illusions that my complaints to date will be worthless, as our regulating bodies appear to be missing more than a few teeth. But as is said so often, it will take a judge to decide. Not wishing to make a total horlicks of the whole thing, I'm so sure of my ground, that my solicitor is more than willing to take this on. And obviously I'll be chasing for costs too, so I won't be out of pocket either.

 

I was going to just pop this in the CFC site, but waht the heck. Let's give WW and co. plenty of time to go and buy some cast iron underpants.

[pmhcfc]

Theres been a lot of water under the bridge since this one, in my opinion, Surlybonds got in 'early' and the relative companies didn't know how to react, this was closely follwed by some 'easy' success where not only default removal was achieved, but compensation too, since then the CRA's, the ICO and the companies concernced - having been prewarned of a possibly revolt, have got their 'act together' and now prepared 'facts' to thwart these attempts to have defaults removed.

 

If you can dispute the actual default, i.e. with bank charges or some mismanagement of a contract or account, you have a good case but the default needs to be included with any court action, if you've not, you're gonna have hell of a job convincing anybody there no legislation and they have no right to process, they've closed ranks without doubt.

 

A judge may agree with you, but then again we have at least one case where a judge didn't really have much of a clue about the DPA and so came out on the side of the 'big boys' and be in no doubt, the ICO are not on our side in this one.

 

Just out of interest, which law and or Act of Parliament states that any defaults have to stay on a record for six years?

[Guest ian cognito]

Woooaahhhhh, I'm on your side here, I have been following most default threads from reading Surlybonds when I first joined CAG and have successfully had the one default I had removed because it could be disputed, I even have a letter from the ICO saying they would investigate the matter, unfortunately the letter took so long to arrive the matter had been sorted before it reached me.

 

All I am saying is that we are gonna keep going round and round in circles, the CRA's are gonna keep referring to their clients and industry standards, as are the ICO, the companies are gonna keep saying they are in the right.

 

We need a new direction to take this, court may sort it but as there are already two cases in progress, we'll know pretty soon which way that is going, even if we can only do as surlybonds did originally and 'throw' them for a while, we are getting nowhere fast with the 6 year industry standard/legislation argument.

[Seahorse]

Can't see any way BUT to keep chasing, even if it's in circles. Either that, or just sit back and wait until all the evidence is in, then just go for it. And I'm not yet at the stage where I CAN just go for it.

 

However, everything on the telly is crap, so I've really nothing better to do to keep myself amused than chase round and round.

 

It's not really about the default for me either. It's about Cabot ****ing me off and telling me things I have little doubt have no basis in fact, trying to get me to pay them something I don't owe. And if I can get a judge to agree with me, perhaps it will make life a little easier for other potential victims of theirs further down the line.

 

Despite Ken's nice shiny website where he would have you believe that all he cares about is HELPING people to repay their debt, all he REALLY cares about is maximising the revenue from the portfolios he buys, irrespective of the actual status of some of the accounts in those portfolios. So Cabot WILL keep chasing vulnerable people for money they don't owe because they know that most will roll over without a fight because they're too ignorant and or frightened to do anything else.

 

I'll chuck a few smilies in so you don't think I'm having a dig at you, just replying to your posts.. :) :)

[Seahorse]

Totally off topic. But I've noticed the profanity filter works on words that contain possible profanity. So I'm going to see what it does with a wee town up northish.

 

I'm going to say S****horpe.

[Seahorse]

HAHAHAHA. It DID delete the dodgy bit. Oh, that has cheered me up for the whole day now.

[Guest ian cognito]

I'll chuck a few smilies in so you don't think I'm having a dig at you, just replying to your posts.. :-) :-)

 

I'm too stupid for a dig to go anywhere but straight over my head anyway!!

 

Incidentally, my first post here was in reply to Rhia's post, not a general dig at what you guys are doing!!! (sorry only just noticed it seems to have been taken that way)

[Seahorse]

I'm too stupid for a dig to go anywhere but straight over my head anyway!!

 

Check for premature baldness then, as over the head can sometimes get too close for comfort.

[darling]

Can I ask a question please ? I contacted Cabot a few months ago with a CCA request for Monument and Barclaycard debts. I've just received a reply with a photo copy of a Signed Application Form for Monument. Does this comply with my request and do I have to start paying again as they are saying that I need to start paying again. Also this paragraph is a bit weird as well.

 

If you still dispute ownership of this account, we will need proof of address for July 2003 in the form of a copy of a tenancy agreement, (i have a mortgage), utility bill, bank statement or an official document. You will also need to report this matter to the Police and obtain a crime reference, which we require along with details of the Police Station and reporting officer.

 

from Emma Robertson

Cabot Financial (Europe)

 

What Now guys ?