Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thames Water is lobbying for higher bills and lower fines to avoid bailout   Thames Water is lobbying for higher bills and lower fines to avoid bailout, report claims – business live | Business | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Britain’s largest water company is trying to avoid a potential multibillion-pound taxpayer bailout   despite giving out large dividends to shareholders and large bonuses to senior management UK water company dividends jump to £1.4bn despite criticism over sewage outflows WWW.FT.COM Payments include internal transfers between complex web of holding companies   In charts: how privatisation drained Thames Water’s coffers | Utilities | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Decades of underinvestment and bumper dividends have left the firm debt-laden and under investigation   ‘The whole thing stinks’: water firms to pay £15bn to shareholders as customers foot sewage bill | Water bills | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM With cost of cleanup to be passed on to bill payers, analysis shows they will also pay £624 more by 2030 to fund investor payouts    
    • Are you still claiming Tax Credits / Universal Credit? They will likely take a small monthly amount off , if you are
    • So much for protecting our borders - Guv all just dog whistles   Office for the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration to have budget slashed - Neal The Office for the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration will have its budget cut by five per cent year on year, David Neal has revealed, Holly Bancroft reports. Mr Neal is giving evidence to the Home Affairs Committee in a one-off session on immigration after being sacked by James Cleverly. The home secretary said Mr Neal had “breached the terms of appointment and lost the confidence of the home secretary” after Mr Neal warned of “dangerous” failings by border force that he claimed were allowing “high-risk” aircraft to land in Britain without security checks. The Home Office had “categorically rejected” the claims, saying that Mr Neal “has chosen to put misleading data into the public domain”. You can read more here: Home Office sacks immigration chief after criticism of border security
    • "In an explosive revelation, Mr Staunton also alleged that the current Post Office CEO threatened to resign over a HR investigation into his own conduct. Mr Staunton said Post Office chief executive Nick Read had fallen out with the HR director “and she produced a document that was 80 pages in length” and there was just one paragraph in there about his own conduct and use of “politically incorrect comments”. Mr Staunton said Mr Read was “really quite upset” and threatened to resign a number of times. But just an hour before Mr Staunton’s testimony, Mr Read had denied - under oath - that he had ever having tried to resign."   I’m victim of smear campaign says sacked Post Office chair as he accuses CEO of lying WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK Henry Staunton, sacked by business secretary Kemi Badenoch, gives evidence to Commons committee     see also from the post above "Carl Creswell, an official from the Department for Business and Trade said Tidswell had told Ben Tidswell that some board members might resign if Henry Staunton were not sacked)" Tidswell says he was right (See 11.14am.)"   So baden-ouch seems to be at the very least twisting the truth - no surprise there    
    • As Bazooka Boo said much of the PCN missing and it is the missing pieces that can help your case since the PCN is governed by the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 . If the wording does not comply,  you as keeper are not liable to pay the PCN. Even if you were the driver as Courts do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person it will be pretty hard to prove that you were the driver. All it needs for you to know the whether the PCN is compliant is to post up the whole PCN front and back.
  • 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
      • 160 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

1985 Natwest Mastercard Debt now cabot/wescot


tedney
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 128 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

Hello Everyone!

I had a Natwest Mastercard account, which was defaulted in 2006.

I have been paying off monthly sums direct to Natwest every month since,

no PPI and interest not being added.

Late payment and overlimit fees of £175.00 unclaimed to date.

Account balance approx £8K

 

The account has never ever been shown on any CRA reports, even before defaulted.

 

Natwest have now advised that they have now "partnered" with Wescot Credit Services,

who will now "manage" the remainder of the repayment plan,

and that I should continue to maintain payments direct to Natwest.

 

In view of this, I made a CCA request under section 78 (1).

 

Their response to my CCA request was,

as the account was opened prior to 19th May 1985,

that the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 applies to the account,

and it is therefore sufficient for them to send me a copy of their current terms as a "true copy",

and therefore the agreement is enforceable.

 

The copy that they provided is headed "Credit Card Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974,

and is on the reverse of a "Replacement credit card" letter, addressed to me at my current address,

not at the address where I lived at when the account was opened.

 

Are they correct in their view that the agreement is enforceable?

 

As usual all comments welcome.

Thanks

t

Link to post
Share on other sites

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are other ones too

 

Dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having read some threads, am I correct that Natwest have complied and satisfied my CCA request, but the agreement that they supplied would probably not stand up in court, if it ever came to a claim?

Thanks

t

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its never going to be enforceable from 1985 they don't have it...they may think they have complied with your request but from what you state they provided sounds also like a fail.

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that Andy

Do you think I should write and tell them I disagree with their view, or would it best to wait and see what transpires, if anything?

I am thinking of the latter really.

Thanks again

t

Link to post
Share on other sites

No ...don't give them the heads up...gives them time to rectify...if possible.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again, OK, I will sit and wait again!

Don't know if you have seen my PM's, but I would appreciate your views and comments on my other NW thread:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?266247-natwest-summons-for-joined-overdraft-and-loan/page12

Due in court first week in August.

Regards

t

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I have got your PM Ted..just not had the time as yet.....I will get to it shortly.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Natwest Mastercard account - Is this correct for a 1985 CCA request return?
  • 3 years later...

Admin: I think there is an old thread for this debt?

I requested a CCA from Wescot for this debt on 19th September. As with other debts I was paying a nominal monthly sum to Natwest for this account.

I was then advised that they had passed this debt to Cabot, with Westcot Credit Services Ltd administering the account.

I used to receive monthly statements from Natwest. I continued to pay a monthly sum to Natwest.

After Natwest passed the account on, monthly statements ceased.

Periodically I would get a letter from Wescot about the account which I ignored.

Following the CCA request to Westcot, I received an acknowledgement from them.

Today I received a further letter from Westcot advising me that they "will need to contact their client, this process may take several weeks" !

Do I just wait for their response, or take any other action?

I am not paying anything on this account now.

I notice that their letter received today has a bar code and QR codes on it, which the previous letter did not, and their client is shown as Cabot Financial Europe Ltd-RBS. Is any of that relevant?

Thank

t

Link to post
Share on other sites

ref post #3, I think so, I used the date quoted by an admin on another thread I posted. Please refer to my post #4.

ref honeybee13 post above. My title of this thread was "lifted" from a post by dx100 on another recent thread of mine. In reponse to you original post here I tried to identify from my "history" which of my previous threads was dx referring to.

So this thread could be merged with the old one as it is for the same debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to 1985 Natwest Mastercard Debt now cabot/wescot

threads merged.

dx

 

 

you ignore them until they comply or you ever get a letter of claim.

dx

 

  • Like 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

UPDATE

Have had acknowledgements from both Westcot and Cabot about this matter.

According to Cabot, I am due to get a further update from them by tomorrow!

Westcot correspondence is sent to my correct address, whereas Cabot's letters are still addressed to my old location!

As this account was defaulted a number of years ago, it does not show up on my credit file. Since its' inception, even when it was an operating account, the account has never been included on my credit files!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...