kings hill/hodsons[cabot] claimform - mogan Stanley card **DISCONTINUED**

[elizabeth1]

Go have a look at my thread - I am poster who did skeleton argument in court for hubby etc..

Cabots are going to attempt drown out the CCA with Deeds of Assignments, Sale Agreements and anything they can muster up etc.. Don't let them do this - bring your argument back to CCA and then if/once they prove that document to be in correct format/order move your argument on afterwards if needed. They will try railroad you and Judge etc..

I can't stress enough to people these Judges are really good people and they will listen and help you when presented with a clear argument etc.. BUT we need to have empathy and realise that these Judges are NOT consumer law experts - like us they know some stuff but not all law. So the emphasis is upon us to be clear with what we are aiming at in court. Chances are Hodsons will send in a local locum solicitor with instructions to go for fast track claim - this person will literally pick the file up on the day and won't know the "whole history" of the file/claim involved - so WE have to be more on the ball than ever to stop this being railroaded into Fastrack. We need to stress firmly "we want documents" and help Judge with a clear argument based on what we want.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/cabot/111844-another-cabot-court-case.html

 

Hope this helps - I am no expert really - but if it is kept simple it appears to work in court.

 

Is there a Mod available who could make a sticky out of the first two posts on my thread please? I feel this will really help lots of people - perhaps if we place it in the DCA and Cabot stickies it will be seen help anyone dealing with DCA's and CCA issues.

[mrrj]

This is already fast track , at the last hearing the dj wasnt really interested in my arguments about notice of assignment (not yet recieved) , the fact that the deed of assignment has nothing in it about my agreement and the fact that the ca was unreadable and didnt meet the requirement. The judge was just concerned that the ca wasnt readable. Does anyone know if i need to attend cabots hearing to extend the deadline. What annoys me is they had an order at the end of july after a hearing to supply me with a clear copy which they failed to do ,so i wrote to the courts asking them to strike it out ands the court gave them another seven days to comply. How long will the court give them ? its been seven weeks already.

[Seahorse]

I somehow don't think they'll risk turning up in court with a forgery. Even if it was the judge who told them it was OK. What if he's ill, and another judge sits in? He might throw them in jail???

[elizabeth1]

I somehow don't think they'll risk turning up in court with a forgery. Even if it was the judge who told them it was OK. What if he's ill, and another judge sits in? He might throw them in jail???

 

 

I agree with this point - I don't think Cabots could risk this happening -Judges have a habit of listing these hearings on the next available date for hearings - which isn't necessarily their next available date - so it can often be another judge?

 

With one of my hearings I have had 2 different judges - so they'd be taking risks to do this.

[mrrj]

Think i should attend ? armed with the prescribed terms?

[ODC]

I think you need to turn up in case Crpbot get a judgement by default

[mrrj]

This is just a hearing for cabot to extend the amount of time for them to supply the credit agreement

[ODC]

Go along anyway and object with the new found knowledge you now have

[Seahorse]

How much time do they need? If they haven't got one by now, how likely is it that one exists? Not very, in my opinion.

[ODC]

They have as much chance of turning up the CCA as we have of seeing Elvis riding Shergar in the Grand National

[Seahorse]

At odds of 2-1

[elizabeth1]

This is just a hearing for cabot to extend the amount of time for them to supply the credit agreement

 

 

Well - if they have one for you - I am sure you'll be the first

[ODC]

two quid each way on cabot falling at the first. Mrrj to win by two furlongs in a one furlong race

[elizabeth1]

two quid each way on cabot falling at the first. Mrrj to win by two furlongs in a one furlong race

 

ha ha I suppose there is no contest really - shame they feel they need to put themselves through this torture time and time again isn't it? High time they just learnt to hold their hands up?

[mrrj]

Where will i find prescribed terms in the cca to print out and take with me to show the judge that a typed copy is not accepteble.

[ODC]

Try this http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collectors-debt-collection/105315-my-agreement-enforceable-useful.html

[mrrj]

Think this covers it

 

60.—(1) The Secretary of State shall make regulations as to the form and content of

documents embodying regulated agreements, and the regulations shall contain such

provisions as appear to him appropriate with a view to ensuring that the debtor or

hirer is made aware of—

(a) the rights and duties conferred or imposed on him by the agreement,

(b) the amount and rate of the total charge for credit (in the case of a consumer

credit agreement),

© the protection and remedies available to him under this Act, and

(d) any other matters which, in the opinion of the Secretary of State, it is desirable

for him to know about in connection with the agreement.

 

(2) Regulations under subsection (1) may in particular—

35

(a) require specified information to be included in the prescribed manner in

documents, and other specified material to be excluded;

(b) contain requirements to ensure that specified information is clearly brought to

the attention of the debtor or hirer, and that one part of a document is not given

insufficient or excessive prominence compared with another.

 

(3) If, on an application made to the Director by a person carrying on a consumer

credit business or a consumer hire business, it appears to the Director impracticable

for the applicant to comply with any requirement of regulations under subsection

(1) in a particular case, he may, by notice to the applicant direct that the

requirement be waived or varied in relation to such agreements, and subject to such

conditions (if any), as he may specify, and this Act and the regulations shall have

effect accordingly.

 

(4) The Director shall give a notice under subsection (3) only if he is satisfied that

to do so would not prejudice the interests of debtors or hirers.

 

61.—(1) A regulated agreement is not properly executed unless

(a) a document in the prescribed form itself containing all the prescribed terms

and conforming to regulations under section 60(1) is signed in the prescribed

manner both by the debtor or hirer and by or on behalf of the creditor or owner,

and

(b) the document embodies all the terms of the agreement, other than implied terms,

and

© the document is, when presented or sent to the debtor or hirer for signature, in

such a state that all its terms are readily legible.

[Seahorse]

61 (b) fecks one of Cabot's favourite arguments up. . . other than implied terms

[mrrj]

Just back from court and had a better day today.

 

Different DJ who had a bit of savy and a young locum solicitor who tried to tell the DJ that cabot were going to type me a copy of the Credit Agreement from morgan stanleys files and rates at the time of the agreement.

 

The judge laughed it off and told the locum they have 14 days to provide a typed copy of the CA and the ledgible copy it was copied from.

 

Sounds like a tough job to me.

 

I cant believe cabot thought they could just make up any old copy and pass it as my CCA.

[debt_mountain]

Excellent, thats them kicked into touch then......

 

Well done.

 

14 days and counting.

[Jeff2000]

This is brilliant news!!!

 

Fingers crossed for 14 days then!

 

 

Regards, Jeff.

[Seahorse]

Cabot had one last chance to comply. . .

 

[ODC]

Oh dear they are the weakest link

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

GOODBYE

[mrrj]

who had 2-1 on me?

[ODC]

Everyone Here:d