Seahorse v Cabot

[andrew1]

I have just read your thread from begining to end. What a saga. It seems to me from reading numerous threads that everyone is getting into huge amounts of correspondence with these companies when it is much easier to make the company do the work.

 

Actually, make them active runners ( where dyou get a name like that ? ) you are probably right - we would welcome your suggestions, what have you got in mind exactly - it's always good to have fresh idea's we all seem to be getting a little stale on here.. fire away....join the debate...?

[andrew1]

....and seahorse get posting will you ... you are on 666 at the minute and making me nervous ! :D

[make them aktiv runners]

edit

[pmhcfc]

Firstly why bother sending £1 for CCA. quote]

 

It's what the CC Act says to do..

[tbern123]

Firstly why bother sending £1 for CCA. If the company has a genuine legal case then they would bend over backwards to help you believe they are honest.

 

The bits about doorstep collectors and trespass is good. The same can be adapted to telephone. Insist you will only deal with written communication.

 

Do not tell them which laws you can prosecute under or which authorities you can report them to. Simply tell them that you know as well as them where they can be in breach of the law and subject to any action/reporting you chose. That way they cannot guess what you actually know (there may be other laws they are aware of but obviously they cannot guess if you know them too) Basically a little information stops them making judgments on your abilty against a legal eagle of theirs.

 

Insist that they prove the debt as they would be required to do so in court and that it is in fact legally enforceable. Make it clear the burden of proof is theirs and theirs alone - you will not assist giving them info or pay towards the cost of supplying it as it should already be in their possession.

 

Finally make it clear that until they have provided sufficient qualilty evidence you will not respond to their letters

 

PS Don't forget to add "I do not acknowledge any debt to your company"

 

I hear what you are saying, but where is the fun in that ??? It is all fun and games.

[andrew1]

Firstly why bother sending £1 for CCA. If the company has a genuine legal case then they would bend over backwards to help you believe they are honest.

 

The bits about doorstep collectors and trespass is good. The same can be adapted to telephone. Insist you will only deal with written communication.

 

Do not tell them which laws you can prosecute under or which authorities you can report them to. Simply tell them that you know as well as them where they can be in breach of the law and subject to any action/reporting you chose. That way they cannot guess what you actually know (there may be other laws they are aware of but obviously they cannot guess if you know them too) Basically a little information stops them making judgments on your abilty against a legal eagle of theirs.

 

Insist that they prove the debt as they would be required to do so in court and that it is in fact legally enforceable. Make it clear the burden of proof is theirs and theirs alone - you will not assist giving them info or pay towards the cost of supplying it as it should already be in their possession.

 

Finally make it clear that until they have provided sufficient qualilty evidence you will not respond to their letters

 

PS Don't forget to add "I do not acknowledge any debt to your company"

 

Do you really feel this is a better approach? Many have been, as you say digging themselves deep in correspondence, you appear to feel that is wasting time a little, I'm all for less paperwork and sometimes we can't see the wood for the trees. These companies have come back with many inconsistancies. Have you any particular experience that has worked for you ?

[make them aktiv runners]

edit

[Snorkmoth]

Maybe Im being thick but how do I make a general posting on the forum? I havent done one yet and am bursting to TELL!!!

Barbara

[tbern123]

They can't use the £1.00 to reactivate the debt.

 

The payment of £1.00 cannot be taken as acknowledgment of the debt. You make a CCA request because you dispute the debt. Sadly most of these companies will not provide you with copies of documentation unless you make an official request.

 

I hear what you are saying, but most of these companies do not even have the correct documentation.

 

In an ideal world, we could just ask, but it is far from an ideal world and these companies do not play fair, wouldn't you agree ?

[tbern123]

Maybe Im being thick but how do I make a general posting on the forum? I havent done one yet and am bursting to TELL!!!

Barbara

 

All you have to do is go onto the cabot Forum and click on new thread

[pmhcfc]

Okay I'll put it another way. You owe me £20. Now are you going to fork out money to prove me wrong?????

 

No! So why pay these companies. If its genuine then they would supply anyway for the simple reason that they want the money out of your pocket what they claim is theirs. They know full well that the burden of proof is theirs and are just playing games by making you believe that you must apply under CCA. They may use CCA £1 to reduce their claimed debt thus reactivating a default on your credit record/making a more recent default hit on your credit record.

 

Is this your problem with Cabot then? Have they done this to you with the £1.00 payment you sent ?

[make them aktiv runners]

edit

[Seahorse]

My advise to anyone receiving these letters is not to be frightened by them, read the sentences very carefully and interpret what they are really saying.

 

Well, Sherlock will be glad you weren't around in auld Victorian London.

 

You'd have done him out of a job with reasoning powers like that.

 

(I'd apologise, but as you've read my whole thread, you'll have realised I'm not the most tactful person in the world.)

[make them aktiv runners]

edit

[make them aktiv runners]

edit

[andrew1]

So what Act are you referring to? or are you saying we don't need an Act?

Also you mention that Aktiv are trying to find you ( hope they fail ) but have you had the same with Cabot by any chance and if so do you see similarities?

 

To be honest, running or trying not to be found seems incongruous for someone who seems to have a handle on things, would it be inappropriate for you to share some of your experience here and do you have a thread we can follow? So many people like you who have suffered keep their experiences to themselves until they feel they are amongst friends here and share.. what have you gone through if you don't mind me asking .perhaps we can all learn a bit too...

[Seahorse]

To be honest, running or trying not to be found seems incongruous for someone who seems to have a handle on things

 

Not to mention seems somewhat fraudulent. We're supposed to be using the law to beat this lot, not trying to fall foul of the law ourselves.

 

If that's the sort of message you're trying to give to others, I'd much rather you did it off my thread, please.

[make them aktiv runners]

edit

[Seahorse]

Well, not entirely true. You request your personal information as a right under the Data Protection Act, and your documents as per the Consumer Credit Act. There is absolutely NO point expecting this lot to send you ANYTHING they don't have to, even if as you say, it would logically be in their best interest.

 

For this reason alone, I think Cabot do their best to get your original agreement in response to a CCA request, despite their contention that Act doesn't apply to them. I think it's them putting on the cast iron underpants, just in case Mr Judge says, Yes, it it DOES apply to you, so why didn't you supply it in the first place? At least their ar*e is covered then.

 

Doesn't explain why they don't supply other things you request under the CCA though. Only explanation is, they can't get their hands on things like statements for some reason. Although, if I don't get mine back from Barclaycard soon, I guess the real reason is, there ARE no statements to send me. Shame. That being the case, I guess Barclaycard are buggered then. I wonder if Cabot will lend them said cast iron underpants?

[pmhcfc]

Well, not entirely true. You request your personal information as a right under the Data Protection Act, and your documents as per the Consumer Credit Act. There is absolutely NO point expecting this lot to send you ANYTHING they don't have to, even if as you say, it would logically be in their best interest.

 

For this reason alone, I think Cabot do their best to get your original agreement in response to a CCA request, despite their contention that Act doesn't apply to them. I think it's them putting on the cast iron underpants, just in case Mr Judge says, Yes, it it DOES apply to you, so why didn't you supply it in the first place? At least their ar*e is covered then.

 

Doesn't explain why they don't supply other things you request under the CCA though. Only explanation is, they can't get their hands on things like statements for some reason. Although, if I don't get mine back from Barclaycard soon, I guess the real reason is, there ARE no statements to send me. Shame. That being the case, I guess Barclaycard are buggered then. I wonder if Cabot will lend them said cast iron underpants?

 

Well SH, you know BC and Cabot Financial are in each other's pockets, so it's safe to say they share the same trousers.... BTW, nice to see that you still make very valid points elsewhere in the post- despite the fact you've been quiet, what you post is still worth reading

[andrew1]

BTW, nice to see that you still make very valid points elsewhere in the post- despite the fact you've been quiet, what you post is still worth reading

 

don't get carried away pmhcfc, seahorse is difficult enough to keep under control as it is anyway, it's good to have people coming on to challenge what we are doing because it's good to get others perspective on things. How do we know what Cabot are thinking or any of the others like Aktiv or Capquest?

 

I hope our new friend feels welcome and happy to share his/her thoughts with us.. from me at least - welcome aboard.

[pmhcfc]

don't get carried away pmhcfc, seahorse is difficult enough to keep under control as it is anyway, it's good to have people coming on to challenge what we are doing because it's good to get others perspective on things. How do we know what Cabot are thinking or any of the others like Aktiv or Capquest?

 

I hope our new friend feels welcome and happy to share his/her thoughts with us.. from me at least - welcome aboard.

 

I conur...That's true what you say about ole SH...( I can't help wondering if he's like that Sea Captain in Blackadder II )

[Seahorse]

What law says that you are only allowed to request information under CCA? In fact reading company letters have they actually told you before you sent your £1 that they are referring to CC agreement? Even in the unlikely event they did, you still do not have to use the same act to demand proof, you are just being made to believe that you must!

 

And besides... the reason we request under the CCA is, we CAN. It says so in the CCA. Which is the Act that covers the agreement we "supposedly" signed in the first place, and is in any case the Agreement that we are requesting.

 

Simply put, we are requesting a copy of an agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974, so therefore we MUST use the CCA as the basis for our request.

 

See????

 

Nowhere do I ever recall seeing any agreement regulated by the Law of Property Act 1925, so if would be rather fatuous to request a copy of such a document, as such a document doesn't exist.

 

Mind you, neither does an Agreement regulated by the CCA as far as me/Barclaycard/Cabot are concerned either. So THAT's all right then.

[Seahorse]

I conur...That's true what you say about ole SH...( I can't help wondering if he's like that Sea Captain in Blackadder II )

 

You have a WOMAN's legs, young Sarah!!! (Although, I suppose, that's no surprise really. )

[make them aktiv runners]

edit