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

[KMC Towers]

mmmm.I may have to stand corrected..

[ODC]

mmmm.I may have to stand corrected..

It would appear that your masters have been economical with the truth.

 

 

No real surprise there then.

[lookinforinfo]

Hi Pmhcfc, sorry I added a few more initials to your name when crediting

you with the article by Mr Maynard.

[joesoap]

mmmm.I may have to stand corrected..

 

Is that a first? No, it isn't!

[KMC Towers]

Is that a first? No, it isn't!

 

 

You'd be suprised Joe soap, very suprised...

[ODC]

You'd be suprised Joe soap, very suprised...

I dont think anything about Ken Maynard and the Cabot Crew would surprise anyone on here

[Seahorse]

I think we are in danger of hijacking TBern's thread here to talk about generalities. Might I suggest we retire to the library for brandy and cigars?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/cabot/107705-general-cabot-chat.html#post1036833

[recompense41]

This is a fascinating thread...

 

Having had the cabot experience myself I'd be interested to hear the outcome of your case. Any news yet?

 

Dee

[tbern123]

Thanks Seahorse..

 

Hello again fellow Cabot victims.. After a break away from all things Cabot, I have now come back to the fold.

 

Finally after nearly 8 months, I am getting closer to a court date. I hae today received instructions from the Judge that we must both file and serve all documents that we are going to rely on before 24th August 2007. My claim will then be heard at the earliest date after the 24th

 

I had been working with them for a possible settlement, but the previously promised documentation has still not arrived.

 

So I guess I better start copying all the information for my case.

[Seahorse]

No documentation as promised? That will be DM getting on the wrong side of certain people.

[elizabeth1]

No documentation as promised? That will be DM getting on the wrong side of certain people.

 

Tut - tut - tut - fancy upsetting these nice people :grin:

[debt_mountain]

oops, sorry folks.

 

Piers Morgan is still talking to me though, only he has restricted his communications to letter, obviously a little confused with this email stuff.

 

Anything you want from us tbern?

[Percival Wigglesbottom]

Wonder what'll happen to our poor Mr Wellinghoff. Probably a fate similar to that of the other great and famous WW , William Wallace, when Ken catches up with him .

[Percival Wigglesbottom]

What does access to white data mean for the debt purchase industry?

Lucy Swannell, Business Support Manager, Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited

 

 

Debt purchasers are about to gain access to positive personal credit information for the first time, does this herald a new era in the debt purchase industry?

 

Historically, debt purchasers have, largely, been able to access only black, or negative, credit data, such as arrears information, on customers within portfolios purchased at default stage. Under new proposals on the supply and access of credit performance information shared through the credit reference agencies (CRAs), debt purchasers will soon also be able to access white, or positive, data. This will include customers’ general levels of indebtedness, the amount of time they have been holders of credit, and the mix of debt they hold between secured and unsecured debt.

 

Most debt purchasers use one or more CRA to obtain address links and already take advantage of some of the white data they hold, but the additional information will help improve their on-line trace processes and pre- and post-purchase risk analysis, leading to better collections. However, to access this extra data, debt purchasers are required to report ‘reciprocal’ default information to the CRAs.

 

The ability to access white data will increase the importance of reporting to the CRAs as debt purchasers who have reciprocal data agreements will be able to price portfolios more competitively through improved risk analysis. Many debt purchasers already report default information and will now need to work with the CRAs to identify portfolios that fall within the proposal criteria and gain access to the additional data. Those who do not already report will need to take the necessary steps to start doing so, or risk becoming uncompetitive.

 

If the debt purchase industry is to take full advantage of the new access to white data, it needs to ensure it is capable of meeting the reporting requirements and of making full use of the information received. Debt purchasers who are not able to do this may find themselves left behind in the old era.

 

So what our Lucy is saying here .. is slap on a default as and when they can and give somebody 6 years of misery, just so they can access your white ( as reciprocal ) data ?

[Seahorse]

TBern has a petition to try to prevent this happening at the PM's site here...

 

Petition to: Restict Access to Consumers White Data By the Debt Purchase Industry.

[andrew1]

This is absolutely horrendous when you see it written so brazenly by Cabot." Ha ha, look what we got all your information and more - well what about the Credit Agreements CABOT ? you don't even have that and here you are smirking about what else you might be getting, this is making me physically sick.

 

She says " Debt purchasers who are not able to do this may find themselves left behind in the old era." - ??? WHAT ??? Do you mean that old era where you come hounding people left right and centre with no agreements?, no legal right to chase a debt?, no supporting documentation to support your threats and intimidation? Commission and prizes for your staff at Credit Today and good ole Ken Maynard traipsing around the country selling the good word of Cabotfinancial.eu ? You gotta be kidding me !

 

Madam, you had better not get so happy, we will stop you. and....... COME ON Experian, Equifax and Call Credit make these damned companies PRODUCE TO YOU the documentation BEFORE you go slapping defaults on. You have a responsibility to make sure peoples accounts are not slighted by 'guilty until proven innocent' tactics in a country where my grandfather fought and lost his life at 34 yrs of age for our freedoms.......DONT LET THEIR LIVES BE LOST IN VAIN.

 

IF I was on a mission before, you ain't seen nothing yet!

[Percival Wigglesbottom]

Is a default held in a certain 'bucket' one lodged at the time of you originally getting your default notice , all additions to that same notice being added to that bucket , and therefore all falling off your credit record at the same time ... or or they all seperate entrys, all time stamped , so when your original default falls of the end of the 6 years.. the additions still remain , or more importantly.. can be still added to so that it still shows after the 6 years ?

 

Elizabeth, you will not get help from the CRA's, they are in it together. They are owned by the credit and DCA companies. The only way to stop it is by government legislature . Ideally someday, credit data will be held by a independant entity with far more stringent rules as to how companies can access or add to in the way of default or black data .

[andrew1]

Percival, you should read surelybonds 'default hell' threads. They explain exactly what the CRA's don't want to hear. Its hard work and a long read, but the CRA's do not get our data through legislation, they set themselves up and everyone believes that 6yrs worth of data is what happens by law. Surleybonds will tell you different, will tell you how to get the data removed and tell you exactly where in the pecking order these CRA's belong.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legalities/20118-default-hell.html?highlight=default+hell

 

enjoy....

[Percival Wigglesbottom]

Thanks for that link, will read now )

 

At the moment , everything is ok for me.. default -wise . Everything fell off in 2005 with the CRA's . I was just wondering if a debt purchaser after say 10 years after the original default could make any additions, and if they could.. would it add to the old 'bucket' of information from 1997 and not show or would it show up as 2007 and therefore be seen again . There isnt a lot of real guidelines from what ive seen, not by law . Only guidelines from various bodies.. OFT , CAB , maybe could be construed to be part of the limitations act and therefore 6 years , but thats only an interpretation, theres nothing specific .

[Percival Wigglesbottom]

Once they get to access white data this way you'll see on their web page with the 'satisfied customers' :

 

From Margaret in Kent : Thank you Cabot for defauting me so to access my white data , You have been most professsional in your undertaking of this , the nice lady on the phone told me the default would only last 6 years , again.. many thanks Cabot for an excellent service .

 

Roger in Basingstoke : Thank you Cabot for your deserving default on my account, I have always been meaning to ask you to do this, and now you have provided it free of charge, another thumbs up to the excellent service at Cabot!

 

Peter in Derby : Once again Cabot you have proved to be the best ! , that white data that I thought you did not have on me is now all yours! , and all for the measly sum of me having to pay extortionate interest rates for 6 years.. well done to you all on the Cabot team !

[sansho]

Sorry folks found this extract. Although of little use to Tbern it will be of use to all Caboteers who are beginning action and are getting the boorish argument from Cabot/Hodson's of having the rights but not duties of the creditor.

 

I have added it to the "rights and duties" thread running under this cabot forum, but thought it nice to add it to this thread, as Tbern has been the leading speaker in respect of the cabot onslaught..

 

Regarding Cabot/Hodson's argument that it has the rights and not duties, I've found the following extract that will assist kill off such barren and boorish argument.....

 

"In the case of Rhone v Stephens [1994] 2 AC 310 322, Lord Templeman accepted that conditions relevant to the exercise of a right could be attached to that right in express terms or by implication.

 

This can occur when the assignor must perform certain obligations prior to and as a condition of the non-assigning party performing its obligations. After the assignor assigns its rights to the assignee, the assignee is in no better position than the assignor. Thus, the assignee must perform the assignor's obligations itself (or have someone else do so - this assumption is based on the fact that the original contract expressly or impliedly allows persons other than the assignor to perform the assignor's obligations) before it can enforce its rights against the non-assigning party. This principle has been explained as follows:

 

The fact that an assignment of rights does not in itself impose liability for performance upon the assignee, does not mean that the assignee may enforce the contract if the obligations which it imposes are not performed by either the assignee or the assignor. On the contrary, the assignee takes the rights with all the burdens to which the rights were subject in the hands of the assignor and if he undertakes to enforce the rights by an action, he must show that the conditions have been performed either by his assignor or by himself.

 

This principle was applied in Field v Fitton [1988] 1 NZLR 482 where a buyer assigned its interests under an agreement for sale and purchase of land. The Court of Appeal held that the assignees were not entitled to have the land transferred to them as neither they (nor anyone else) had performed the assignor's obligations under the agreement.

 

Thus there is a risk for assignees relying on assigned rights where their ability to enforce those rights depends on the performance of obligations (especially performance by someone other than the assignee)."

 

[sequenci]

Something else to chew on

 

Tito v Waddell (no 2) [1977] ch 106:

 

"....If the initial transaction has created benefits and burdens which....are distinct, the question whether a person who is not an original party can take one without the other will prima facie depend on the circs in which he comes into the transaction. If, for instance, all that is assigned to him is the benefit of a contract and the assignor, who is a party to the contract, undertakes to continue to discharge the burdens of it, it would be remarkable if it were to be held that the assignee could not take the benefit without assuming the burden. The circs show that the assignee was intended to take only the benefit, and that the burden was intended to be borne in the same way as it had been borne previously".

[Rhia]

This may seem a simplistic question amongst all the good work going on here but it gets us back to this one.

If one is pursuing penalties or mis-sold ppi or even interest back from the OC, once the debt has been assigned to the likes of Cabot does this mean the debtor should pursue the assignee (i.e. Cabot/DCA) for the refund of the same?

[Jeff2000]

This may seem a simplistic question amongst all the good work going on here but it gets us back to this one.

If one is pursuing penalties or mis-sold ppi or even interest back from the OC, once the debt has been assigned to the likes of Cabot does this mean the debtor should pursue the assignee (i.e. Cabot/DCA) for the refund of the same?

 

 

Hi,

 

 

Well I'm now convinced this is so!

 

"it would be remarkable if it were to be held that the assignee could not take the benefit without assuming the burden.":D

 

 

Jeff.

[sequenci]

i'm studying all this right now.. should have an answer in a few days... it's a bit of a mission