Taking Cabot to court for failing to supply HSBC CCA + Distress etc

[tifo]

cool! got get em ....

 

i need clarification cos soon i'm going to write to Cabot (using tbern's inspiration) for the same issue, as well as Lowell group along the same lines.

[andrew1]

Ok sent this to the Information Commissioners Office last night:

 

Dear Mr Information Commissioners Office

 

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my query. Would it be possible for me to ask for further clarification.

 

I appreciate that Kings Hill, purchased the debt and as per the terms of the original agreement, may have my authority to process my data. However, they are still the legal owner of the debt. Taking this into consideration, are they allowed under the Data Protection Act, to disclose my personal data to Cabot and for Cabot to then start processing my personal data.

 

Regards

 

tbern123

 

I thought that this was a straight forward question..

 

Nope, I was wrong... Or are they hinting at something and just not saying it ?

 

26th January 2007

 

 

Case Reference Number ENQ0140575

 

 

Dear Mr tbern123

 

Thank you for your follow-up E mail which I received yesterday.

 

From the information provided, it is not clear whether Kingshill are still the legal owners of the alleged debt, it depends what they have done with it. If, for example, they have sold the debt in its entirety to Cabot, then Cabot will become the legal owners of the debt and have a basis for processing your personal data.

 

As they haven't sold the debt to Cabot, does this mean they shouldn't be processing my data ?

 

In general terms, if an individual owes money there must be an expectation that debt administration agencies may become involved. If a debt is sold on, then clearly the third party organisation which purchases the debt needs personal data about the individual concerned in order to pursue the matter further.

 

I would suggest you need to contact both Kingshill and Cabot to establish the current situation. You should ask them to clarify who is currently dealing with the alleged debt and try to bring the matter to a satisfactory conclusion.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Gary Jones

Casework & Advice Officer

I am going to email back in very simple terms ask for a yes / no

 

This is truely amazing tbern, They really do not seem to have a grasp at all of what has happened to your debt.

 

When the debt was originally sold to Kingshill No1 Ltd does the permission to process your data, without your permission ( Kingshill should have asked your permission in the first place) pass over to them from the original creditor and allow them to pass it to any old A.N.OTHER ?

 

Apart from seemingly trying to give you a lecture on the fact that if you owe money you have to expect a lump of clunkheads like Cabot to be after you ( how dare they suggest it) they do not seem to want to give any clear answer. Court my friend - let the man in the wig sort it !

[tbern123]

Court my friend - let the man in the wig sort it !

 

I hear what you are saying, but if I can get the ICO to confirm in writing that what they have done is wrong, it could have implications for not my own situation but many others that use this forum.....

 

Cabot aren't the only DCA using multiple companies, it appears to be a industry wide accepted way to do business... If I get the confirmation from the ICO I want, we will all have a large stick to batter the DCA's with

 

I am going to send a SAR to Kings Hill tomorrow and enclose a copy of the email from the ICO, stating that the information should come from them, see what comes back.

 

If Cabot respond, they will dig themselves even deeper into a whole

[debt_mountain]

From the information provided, it is not clear whether Kingshill are still the legal owners of the alleged debt, it depends what they have done with it. If, for example, they have sold the debt in its entirety to Cabot, then Cabot will become the legal owners of the debt and have a basis for processing your personal data.

 

but if they had (which to obviously haven't, then Kingshill would no longer be able to do anything with your data and therefore record info with CRAs.

[tbern123]

but if they had (which to obviously haven't, then Kingshill would no longer be able to do anything with your data and therefore record info with CRAs.

 

That is very true....

 

If the ICO come back with the response I want.. Both Kings Hill and Cabot will be in breach of the DPA.... I am sure I don't have to spell out the implications of this to the Cabot Fanclub, but I don't want to get to far ahead of myself.. Life has a funny way of turnign around and kicking you in the butt.

[elizabeth1]

Tbern,

 

I did SAR/CCA Kings Hill (also the messaging services too in Rugby) and I haven't heard a thing from them at all - not even a returned cheque from either of them!!!

 

So there is something weird going on somewhere?? Kings Hill ought to be the ones replying to us (cause they registered default, have been writing crap data for years and also their name is on Hodsons court claim) - now all we have had is a huge silence from Kings Hill.

 

But like I said yesterday we had some SAR data off Cabots (a bundle of irrelavant junk!!) and excuse that the CCA had to come from the debt originators and then today a refund of 10 quid for the SAR - so some "real jiggery pokery" going on in these companies!!

 

Tbern - be so nice if you do get an answer!!

[IIIUMINATI]

May be of interest

 

Search

 

Blog Home | Payplan Home | About | Newsletters

 

Debt Collection Guidance - Compliance Review

 

Posted by Nicky on January 8th, 2007

The Office of Fair Trading last month release a report on the compliance of the Debt Collectors Guidance sheet of 2003.

Results of the review revealed that although improvements have been made since the DC Guidance came into force, there were still identifiable gaps.

3 years before publication of the Guidance, Debt collection accounted for approx. 3% of informal action taken against Consumer Credit Licensees, this has now risen to 12%

The increase shows that the Guidance has successfully raised awareness to debtors and advisors to challenge creditors using unfair practices.

Where the Guidance has not changed industry behaviour, new license provisions will come into force in 2008.

The new Guidance will give the OFT more powers to impose financial penalties where necessary. The current lack of power to impose such penalties has been noted as one of the reasons why some creditors still choose to not change their behaviour in accordance with the 2003 Debt Collectors Guidance.

The OFT analysed representative sample complaint data from the period Apr - Aug 2006 to identify most complained about unfair practices. Information gathered showed that the most complained about practices are:

• Threatening statements mainly over the telephone
  
• Threatening court action without describing the process
  
• Failure to investigate disputed debt
  
• Sending demands when uncertain who the debtor is
  
• Failing to provide debtors/advisors with information/documentation to support creditors demands
  
• Bypassing elected third parties

Other bad practices which are commonly complained about are general intimidation, harassment and licensees mis-stating their powers.

The OFT considers consumer and debtor complaints as a key informational resource when gathering evidence to support complaints about individual companies.

Since the raising of awareness bought about by the 2003 Debt Collection Guidance, the OFT have noted that 60% of their investigation cases resulted in license enforcement action within a 6 month period and 30% within 3 a month period.

The OFT concluded that the majority of traders have shown a willingness to adapt their behaviour to ensure compliance and that a number of cases investigated point to system failure issues such as accuracy of data on debts.

Many complaints appear to arise from inaccurate and incomplete data being passed between different departments within the same company or passed on from a creditor to a debt collection agency when a debt is sold on or its collection is sub-contracted out to another company.

For the traders who choose not to confirm to the guidance set out by the OFT, the new legislation will strengthen the

ability of the OFT to operate the consumer credit licensing regime.

The 2006 act will include a range of sanctions such as financial penalties and the ability to impose a Requirement on a license holder to modify conduct giving rise to fitness concerns.

The OFT will also be able to monitor compliance with the law and OFT Guidance more effectively through use of their new powers to demand information from licensees.

The OFT want to build on the increase in consumer awareness and further encourage consumers to tackle unfair debt collection activity and seek help where they need it.

Click for more information of the Debt Collection Guidance - Compliance Review

UK Debt News | No Comments »

 

 

 

Cheap gas = Higher bills?

 

Posted by Nicky on December 7th, 2006

Since March, power companies have seen their gas costs fall by 36%, so why is it that families are experiencing higher power bills?

People have watched their fuel bills increase to more than £1000 this year. According to charities, lives have been put at risk during the colder months with poorer families left with a choice to either keep warm or eat.

Suspicions have risen within the official consumer body EnergyWatch so much so that they are calling for an inquiry into the UK’s big six power firms, these are:

British Gas

Powergen

SSE

NPower

Scottish Power

EDF

The companies have blamed higher wholesale prices for the increase, however, costs have been reduced?

Reductions in costs are largely down to imported gas suppliers from Norway and the Netherlands. Cheap gas, should mean lower bills.

Research by experts at the website theenergyshop.com show the average wholesale price of gas hit a high of 2.55p per kilowatt hour in March this year. Since then it has fallen by 36% to 1.62p.

By contrast, the retail price paid by consumers has risen by almost 26% to 2.956p per kilowatt hour over the same period

The big 6 are saying that they buy their gas 6-8 months in advance, so people should start to see a drop in their bills by summer 2007.

Energywatch, chief executive, Allen Asher said:

‘If prices fail to come down it will only add to the suspicion that consumers are not being given a fair deal.

‘We believe there should be a Competition Commission inquiry into whether the market is working. Consumers have had enough of the relentless hammering from energy companies. They deserve to know that everything is being done to sort the problem out. Sitting on our hands waiting for prices to fall is not an acceptable response.’

UK Debt News | No Comments »

 

 

 

Bailiffs and the Whistle Blower

 

Posted by Nicky on November 16th, 2006

You may have watched the TV programme Whistleblower screened on 26th September which filmed agents harassing and bullying debtors?

The footage involved official court bailiffs from Drakes and CCS Enforcement Service.

People watching the programme saw that these bailiffs were lying, illegally charging fees for letters never sent and doubling peoples debts, according to the BBC.

Two investigations have now been launched, one by the Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA) and another by an independent source initiated by the Association of Civil Enforcement Agencies (ACEA).

Fred Ternant, chairman of (ACEA) said that they had been asking for Bailiff laws to be regulated for a number of years and there is currently a paper out for the Governments Dept. for Constitutional Affairs which he didn’t expect to see the light of day, although it may do now since the showing of the events on Whistle Blower.

Reverend Paul Nicolson, chairman of Z2k said Bailiffs were out of control. They have no supervised professional standards, an so citizens are unprotected against forced entry to seize property.

It would seem that the exposed actions of some Official Court Bailiffs has stirred things up to leave no option except to take a long hard look at regulating Bailiff Law.

Since the programme had been aired, Drakes has confirmed that three of the bailiffs featured had been sacked and a manager had been demoted after a disciplinary process.

UK Debt News | No Comments »

 

 

 

SpiralFrog

 

Posted by Nicky on September 4th, 2006

If you are a fan of music downloads, a new website called Spiralfrog will be offering ad-supported legal downloads of audio and video content from the worlds major independant record lables.

“Offering young consumers an easy-to-use alternative to pirated music sites will be compelling,” said Robin Kent, SpiralFrog’s CEO. “SpiralFrog will offer those consumers a better experience and environment than they can get from any pirate site.”

Music sites such as HMV, Napster and iTunes generally sell tracks from 29p to 79p, however, Spiralfrog will be offering these tracks for free. This is because they will make their money from the adverts they will show you before you get to download your track.

Spiralfrog is based in New York and music from the site will be available for download from December 2006.

Money Saving Tips | No Comments »

 

 

 

« Previous Entries

 

 

• Archives
  • January 2007
    
  • December 2006
    
  • November 2006
    
  • September 2006
    
  • August 2006
    
  • July 2006
    
  • June 2006
    
  • May 2006
    
  • April 2006
    
  • March 2006
    
  • February 2006

  [*]Categories

  • About This WebLog (1)
    
  • Money Saving Tips (3)
    
  • Personal Finance (6)
    
  • Scams and Fraud Warnings (5)
    
  • UK Debt News (24)
    
  • Website Updates (4)

• Debt Solutions

   

  • Income Maximisation
    
  • Bankruptcy
    
  • Debt Management Plans
    
  • Trust Deeds
    
  • IVA's
    
  • Debt Calculator

  [*]Meta

  • Login
    
  • Valid XHTML
    
  • XFN
    
  • WordPress

  [*]

 

Quick Links: Debt Management | Bankruptcy | IVA | Gambling Debt Payplan blog is proudly powered by WordPress

Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).

 

 

 

 

?

[tbern123]

ok, I have finally got off my backside and sent the following letters to Kings Hill (No.1) Ltd and to cabot Financial (Europe) Ltd. Both letters are virtually identical with subtle differences.... Now I just have to sit back and wait for the reply's.

 

1) Kings Hill (No.1) Ltd

 

28 January 2007

 

 

Kings Hill (No.1) Ltd

10 Kings Hill Avenue,

Kings Hill,

West Malling,

Kent

ME19 4LT

Data Protection Act 1998

Subject Access Request

Your Ref: 1465790, 1188427 & 1173130

 

 

Dear Sir / Madam

Please accept this letter as a request made under the Data Protection Act 1998, for copies of all the data held by the following Data Controller, relating to myself Mr tbern123:

Registration Number: Z7064593

Date Registered: 05 September 2002

 

Data Controller: KINGS HILL (NO 1) LIMITED

For clarification, I would like to take this opportunity to draw your attention to the enclosed email from the Information Commissioners Office:

"According to our internal database, Kingshill and Cabot are two separate data controllers for the purposes of the Act. As such, if you made a request to one company for the personal data they held about you, it would seem unusual if the information in question was provided by the other company."

Taking this into consideration, I respectfully request a response from Kings Hill (No.1), not their appointed agents Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited. Failure to fulfill my request will be reported to the Information Commissioners Office. I enclose the statutory maximum fee of £10. You have 40 days in which to comply.

 

I expect the information you provide, to also include copies of my authorisation for Kings Hill (No.1) to disclose my personal data (as defined by the DPA), to their agents Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited.

Regards

 

tbern123

 

2) Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited

 

Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited

10 Kings Hill Avenue,

Kings Hill,

West Malling,

Kent

ME19 4LT

Data Protection Act 1998

Subject Access Request

Your Ref: 1465790, 1188427 & 1173130

 

 

Dear Sir / Madam

Please accept this letter as a request made under the Data Protection Act 1998, for copies of all the data held by the following Data Controller, relating to myself Mr tbern123:

Registration Number: Z5415234

 

Date Registered: 26 April 2001

 

Registration Expires: 25 April 2007

 

Data Controller: CABOT FINANCIAL (EUROPE) LIMITED

For clarification, I would like to take this opportunity to draw your attention to the enclosed email from the Information Commissioners Office:

"According to our internal database, Kingshill and Cabot are two separate data controllers for the purposes of the Act. As such, if you made a request to one company for the personal data they held about you, it would seem unusual if the information in question was provided by the other company."

Even if the information held by Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited is the same as Kings Hill (No.1) Ltd, please provide me additional copies of this information.

 

I also request copies of my authorisation for Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited, to process my personal data (as defined by the DPA). Failure to fulfill my request will be reported to the Information Commissioners Office. enclose the statutory maximum fee of £10. You have 40 days in which to comply.

 

Regards

 

tbern123

 

Let's see if Kings Hill reply......

[wheresmyhairgone]

mr tbern

 

do you mind if i post a question on your thread. i,m getting no response elsewhere?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-consumer-issues/61487-halifax-rds.html

[Turnaround]

The respective replies to your letters will be interesting.

[tbern123]

mr tbern

 

do you mind if i post a question on your thread. i,m getting no response elsewhere?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-consumer-issues/61487-halifax-rds.html

 

Not at all, however can all responses please be posted in that thread

[lookinforinfo]

Are you taking any bets on Kingshill responding to your Cabot enquiry, and

Cabot answering for Kingshill?

[tbern123]

Are you taking any bets on Kingshill responding to your Cabot enquiry, and

Cabot answering for Kingshill?

 

lol, I'll consider myself lucky if I manage to get any response at all.

 

Whatever they do, I'll be happy

 

1) Only one replies - report them to the ICO,

2) Both reply - report them to the ICO for sharing data

3) Neither reply - report them to the ICO

 

Can people see where this is heading

[tifo]

good letters.

 

but, i am confused as to what the ICO can do.

 

i made a complaint today against Lowell Group (will do the same with Cabot Group) but at the bottom of the form it states "i understand that you have no powers to punish an organisation for any likely breach of the Act and that you cannot award compensation".

 

so ... reads as they cannot do anything?

[elizabeth1]

Sure going to be interesting seeing what responses come back to those letters!!

 

So far Kings Hill haven't responded to our SAR at all. The stuff we had came from Cabots.

[Turnaround]

Cheque Mate......Thats if they dont cash them

[lookinforinfo]

Tifo you are right they do ony have limited powers.

They can hit companies who don't comply with the notification part of the Act, but otherwise all they can do is advise us to seek recompense from the Court.

[tamadus]

lol, I'll consider myself lucky if I manage to get any response at all.

 

Whatever they do, I'll be happy

 

1) Only one replies - report them to the Information Commissioners Office,

2) Both reply - report them to the Information Commissioners Office for sharing data

3) Neither reply - report them to the Information Commissioners Office

 

Can people see where this is heading

 

I'm getting a vague hint the commissioners office may be involved

[tbern123]

good letters.

 

but, i am confused as to what the Information Commissioners Office can do.

 

i made a complaint today against Lowell Group (will do the same with Cabot Group) but at the bottom of the form it states "i understand that you have no powers to punish an organisation for any likely breach of the Act and that you cannot award compensation".

 

so ... reads as they cannot do anything?

 

From my own personal point of view, it is all about building a case. The more things I can identify that these companies have done wrong, the stronger any future claim will be.

[Guest The Terminator]

From my own personal point of view, it is all about building a case. The more things I can identify that these companies have done wrong, the stronger any future claim will be.

 

Well done tbern you've got my 100% support.I'm seriously thinking about a S35 request to sue that barstaff from Mbusa the one who sent me that maliousus letter.If I can get his address it won't take me long to slap something on him.Anyway tbern give them enough rope........

[tbern123]

Well done tbern you've got my 100% support.I'm seriously thinking about a S35 request to sue that barstaff from Mbusa the one who sent me that maliousus letter.If I can get his address it won't take me long to slap something on him.Anyway tbern give them enough rope........

 

 

Thanks alot Terminator... All support greatly appreciated.

[Rhia]

Information Officer can only go so far but it is not good for any company to be reprimanded by them. I have already reported one company on behalf of my son and they were reprimanded quite severely for non compliance with data request. And they were pretty annoyed about this too and got very stroppy.

However if you want to push it even further once they have found in your favour then you take it to court. Tbern is quite correct in that it is case building.

P.S. I think Tbern is starting to resemble a cross between Robin Hood, Braveheart, Scott of the Antarctic, Wing Co Douglas Bader and Luke Skywalker. And to add a bit of Churchill - we will fight them in the hillsides and on the beaches. We will never surrender.

[tbern123]

I think Tbern is starting to resemble Churchill - we will fight them in the hillsides and on the beaches. We will never surrender.

 

Certainly, getting the belly, due to all the time I spend on this site....

[tamadus]

I have now got confirmation they are looking into my complaint about GE Money so wrote a nice long letter today linking the crowd at Asset Link into it

 

They operate so much like Cabot it could almost be the same companies involved. I'll be picking your brains soon tbern

[tifo]

Tifo you are right they do ony have limited powers. They can hit companies who don't comply with the notification part of the Act, but otherwise all they can do is advise us to seek recompense from the Court.

 

OK ...

 

so what is the next port of call after the Information Commissioners Office?

 

i assume the OFT?

 

i ask because i will have a strong case against Lowell (see me thread here [url=http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collectors-debt-collection/61207-lowell-group-2-defaults.html%29][/url]http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collectors-debt-collection/61207-lowell-group-2-defaults.html ).

 

Basically the debt is with either Lowell Portfolio or Lowell Financial. However, both have issued 2 defaults each for 1 debt. Obviously one of them has no right to my personal information, never mind to issue multiple defaults ....

 

I'm trying to gather info to build a case against them ...

 

It's very much like King's Hill / Cabot .... who i will also chase soon as tbern has done (using his thread as an inspiration of course).