Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I apologise if I was being unclear. Where it currently stands is that they will have it repair, placing scaffolding in our garden for 5 days. They have moved fast, but we will still have to postpone our contractors, meaning, we won't necessarily have the work done in time for the wedding and therefore will incur additional expenses for either a marquee or a wedding venue. They are vehemently against having any kind of liability in any regard but continue repeating that they are legally entitled to use our garden for their repairs (I believe this is true unless the work can be carried out using a cherry picker). The neighbour seems either indifferent or oblivious to the fact they can't reach all of the side of the roof from the space where they can place the scaffolding. They have asked their roofer of choice about using a cherry picker but the roofer has said it wasn't possible. It's not clear whether the roofer doesn't want to use a cherry picker or whether there is an issue with it. They have told us it is a problem that we are installing a gazebo as it will prevent them to access their roof from our garden in the future?!?  
    • Couldn't agree more, really wanted a true ruling on this just for the knowledge but pretty sure the Judge made some decisions today that he didn't need to?.. maybe they all go this way on the day? We hear back so few post court dates I'm not sure. Each Judge has some level of discretion. Their sol was another Junior not even working at their Firm, so couldn't speak directly for them! that was fortunate I think because if she would have rejected in court better, she might have  been able to force ruling, we are at that point!, everybody there!!, Judge basically said openly that he can see everything for Judgement!!!  but she just said "I can speak to the claimant and find out!" - creating the opportunity for me to accept. I really think the Judge did me a favor today by saying it without saying it. Knowing the rep for the sol couldn't really speak to the idea in the moment. Been to court twice in a fortnight, on both occasions heard 4 times with others and both of my claims, the clerk mention to one or both parties "Letting the Judge know if you want to have a quick chat with each other"! So, it appears there's an expectation of the court that there is one last attempt at settling before going through the door. So, not a Sol tactic, just Court process!. Judge was not happy we hadn't tried to settle outside! We couldn't because she went to the loo and the Judge called us in 10 minutes early! - another reason to stand down to allow that conv to happen. Stars aligned there for me I think. But yeh, if the sol themselves, or someone who can make decisions on the case were in court, I would have received a Judgement against today I think. She was an 'advocate'.. if I recall her intro to me correctly.. So verbal arguments can throw spanners in Court because Plinks dogs outsource their work and send a Junior advocate.
    • that was a good saving on an £8k debt dx
    • Find out how the UK general elections works, how to register to vote, and what to do on voting day.View the full article
    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
  • 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
      • 161 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

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


tbern123
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5439 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

I know I am like a dog with a bone, this right and duties has really got my back up.

 

Can people please post what happened to their £1 when they made their CCA request.

 

Well - it's like this!!! :confused: I shall tell you a TRUE story!!! :)

 

I sends off to Cabots a 12 quid postal order to cover 2 x CCA and SAR details.

 

I also sends off 10 quid cheque to Kings Hill for SAR info.

 

Then cause me getting loads of lovely robots (whoops me means peoples) calling me everyday from these nice Messaging Services peoples in Rugby - me thinks they might need my info - so I also writes with 10 quids cheque asking for SAR info.

 

NOW THIS IS THE FUN BITS!!!

 

My CABOTS 12 quid Postal order was cashed - and I got a letter from Cabot - with a scrawny looking (black & grey) peice of paper - they tell me it's a copy of "Application Form" they'll send other stuff later. BUT I did get a very nice Barclays cheque for a tenner off Mr M!!! Dunno what happened to the other CCA though - or remainders of stuff.

 

My Kings Hill cheque for a tenner was actually cashed :lol: Ghosts must have want new sheets?? :lol:

 

BUT the magic bits was ... my messaging services Cheque for a tenner came back to me via Cabots telling my I am a silly Billy - I made a duplicate request to a wrong company. :?: NOW lets think about this - Rugby and Kings Hill/West Malling is how many miles apart?? Geez the post man is not only CLEVER but very fit?? to know I meant KH of Cabots in Kent?? EXCELLENT SERVICE and well worth the stamp to see that happen??

 

NOW - even more curious - the experian reports do show the default figures exactly the same - yet hundreds of pounds added to these accounts with interest!!

 

So I couldn't say what happens to the pounds at all - I reckon they hit the couldron??

 

BUT it's all a bit like magics to me!! :!:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

As they claim they are not the creditor, what are they doing with the £1 statutory fee for the CCA request

 

 

I keep thinking that if I was the Banks / CC Companies and had these defaulted debts on my accounts etc..

 

Would I sell the "rights" to these debts and want to be responsible in carrying out the duties myself ???

 

Don't think so - cause common sense would make me sell the "whole" thing and wash my hands of it altogether!! It wouldn't make proper business sense to just sell the rights would it??

 

OK - Maybe I just need coffee and "puffy eye cream" ?? :confused:

 

Just doesn't seem business sense to me - maybe I lost plot somewhere?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are spot on.. Why have all the grief and none of the benefits

 

 

Exactly - they'd all be CHARITIES if they were this way inclined??

 

"Here - you have this for monkey nuts - we'll keep the responsibilities and graft - you go ahead and milk these people for what you can get!!" Lizzy not thinking this is so!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

WW, GC and KM have got some catching up to do tomorrow. I wonder if they get together and discuss the things we post...

 

I would love to be a fly on the wall during one of those meetings.

 

 

This company sure do need to wake up and smell the coffee!!! We seem to be doing their jobs for them? I reckon they should just give up and save themselves the headaches!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

pERHAPS we should form a venture capitalist group and buy them out !

 

( I've got a spare shilling (had budgeted it for the gas meter) to fund the purchase ( management buy out) of cabot(we've got some privet in the garden so perhaps i could form a "hedge fund") then we could sack em and sell the debts back to joe public at 10 pence in the pound .

 

In fact why couldn't some charity set itself up like cabot ?? and do just that ??

 

 

I RECKON WE'D MAKE A REALLY GOOD TEAM!!! :grin:

 

Maybe that's their problem ? too many EGO's to get the job done right? did no one ever tell them there is no "I" in team? I often see it's the complete lack of internal "communications" that causes problems in these companies as left hand never knows what right hand is doing etc.. and they repeatedly fail to cascade information and decisions made to the relevant staffing etc.. - but while that stuff goes on the bigger the problems get?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I worked for an engineering company once where the shop steward ( we had unions then ( pre maggie :grin: ) was a hell raiser and had us all out on strike more times than we had lunch breaks... any excuse - 'down tools' - so what did the company do? - made him personnel manager, gave him a car, bought him a suit, doubled his salary ( probably ) and brought him into management - he was not a popular bunny with the Union but the strikes stopped - Ken - are you reading? - there's a few who might be worth employing out here ! :grin: :grin:

 

 

I reckon they employ us all and give us double salaries, posh cars and suit allowances!!! Oh!!! and extened lunch hours!!!:grin:

 

My Grandad used to always joke his ideal job would be working 12 midday through till 2pm - with an hour for his lunch break and two half hour tea breaks :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what the heck is this all about????

 

My credit report USED to say I defaulted on a balance of £2,032, which is what Cabot are trying to lever out of me still.

 

BUT. My credit report NOW says I defaulted on a balance of £3,221

 

Either I defaulted on one figure or the other. You can't just go and change the amount after the event, Cabot. Just what sneaky, underhand jiggery pokery are you up to now????

 

Or was it Barclaycard who are being sneaky and devious, and have been in there recently? Despite the fact that they have sold the debt on?

 

Time for another query to Experian. (REAL SHOES!!!)

 

Geez!!!! Looks like they need new accountants too?? that's some change of balance!!! :???:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeepers. I go away for a day or two and all hell breaks loose...great work!

So in Mr Crawford's view we who have the brass neck to contest their methods, morality and legality are rogues are we? I take it he means like those Japanese "rogues" who were "systemically massaging their accounts" to get within a gnat's of being delisted by the Tokyo Stock Exchange. Oh whoops! Forgot, they are the "rogues" who are bankrolling Cabot.

Also let's get a historical perspective of their use of the 1925 Property Act to support their activities. In 1925 the man in the street just didn't borrow money. There were well-to-do folks with property and land but the working classes usually either starved, went without or pawned the odd item. That carried on until the 1960s or so when the most anyone borrowed was a small mortage or the odd HP for a fridge. By 1974 the consumer credit market was growing apace and needed new legislation to PROTECT THE CONSUMER and so it's fair to say that this act is the one to be called upon in cases of consumer credit.

Also Mr Crawford if you're reading. I am owed a tidy sum in "restitution" by the original lender so I will be taking great pleasure in pursuing you for said resitution via the courts if necessary.

 

 

Rhia you are so right !!!!

 

GONE are the days where these companies can ride over us all and take us for these huge sums of money as they've become so accustomed to for supporting their own rich living!! So it's high time they got used to it ??

 

These people are behaving like toddlers in such comments as "rogues" - because we simply dare to question their authority?? :grin:

 

ME THINKS THEY NEED TO LOOK VERY CLOSE IN A MIRROR AND THEN IF CAP FITS?? :mad: Me reckons Mr C has his nose too near his rear end and don't like the smell ? :???: It's an outrageous comment from him classifying people as "Rogues" because he hasn't got answers to our reasonable questions - what sort of businessman is he?

 

Answers on a postcard PLEASE!!! Let's keep this forum clean - children maybe reading :grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

EXCELLENT POST

 

The worm has turned. Dot your I's and cross your T's.

 

 

The more people who tape these calls and retain them for evidence the better. The threatenting, abusive, bullying and sometimes illegal behaviour of DCA call centres would make great news in the tabloids and the courts would have a field day. Maybe then when some of them have their licences revoked and their cash cows (sorry call centres) closed will they learn to deal with debtors in a fair manner

 

It seems FAIR isn't a word in the vocabulary of this company? Now what these guys seem to be "beefing" about is the fact that we are challenging their miserable ways.

We aren't going anywhere - least of all corners!!!

 

We are opening our eyes and mouths and asking questions - we aren't getting sensible answers in reply at all. What we are being met with is the sheer arrogance from a bunch of bullies who live to intimnidate and scare people for their own profits!! What they have been doing is very wrong and nasty and they ought to be ashamed of themselves!!

 

These companies have abused people for many years by all of their methods of intimidation - SEEMS like they don't like being challenged?? Things are getting a little HOT for them? Their days of continued bullying of people are nearly done with.

 

More than one way to skin a Rabbit? They'd better believe it cause things will evolve and they will meet their match :grin: :grin: :grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I too have been thinking about a media expose and totally agree the tabloids are no the ones for such a potentially important story. The Independent is one such publication as is the Sunday Times Insight Team who in the past have notched up some impressive investigative journalism. Panorma or Whistleblower or Moneybox of course any of those serious broadcasters NOT Watchdog I don't think as it's too much of a magazine type approach and they would just skim the surface. They'd only need to read this thread from end to end to see the angles.

 

I couldn't agree more with you - if this is going to be done - it needs to be done in a way that is going to be RIGHT!! We don't need to sensationalise these companies at all - what we need to do is show them up for the operations that they are (excuse me while I go to a corner and mutter!!)

 

The fact that this Crawford guy is so easily trying to classify and label those who dare to ask questions of their company is just a "spoilt brat" comment from a man trying to justify the ill deeds of his company. You see never before have these people had such a wake up call where the "rogues" have seen their rights to question the validity of their bullying!!!

 

However - they do need to start keeping notes and acting more responsibly with their doings!! They have been wrong for so many years and we are slowly turning the table on them!!! I reckon their days are numbered and as much as the label and name call - this dodgy past is going to bite them on the bum!! :lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry - internet connection playing silly b's again! :eek:

 

 

Told you - we need to go work there and put this place straight between us all?? They really need our help!!! :D

 

Now how can you get qualifications like that and not know this stuff?? I reckon he slept through those lectures?? Someone go give him a nudge wake him up!!! :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Rhia

 

I think their 'debt life-cycle methodology' refers to the way that they buy 'near statute barred' debts (near end of life-cycle) and then extend their value and their life-cycle by coercing/tricking/bullying debtors into admitting the debt and therefore renewing the 6 year limitation period! :mad:

 

Regards, Pam

I agree Pam - seems to be the way these thugs are operating?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I've just been reading my Cabot files. In preparation for the start of the summons serving.

 

In each of the early letters from the customer service people they happily quote their rights under the CCA 1974. They indicate they are serving defaults under the terms of the CCA 1974. They are contractually obliged to report to CRA, etc. The CCA is our best friend.

 

Nipping up to the top floor of Cabop Rowers and they are shouting it's the law of property. HMMMM!

 

What ever way Cabot are trying to spin this they are leaving no way out.

 

CCA offences clearly committed. Spin it the other way to the law of Property and there's CCA offences clearly committed.

 

 

These companies / people have been so silly - they have repeatedly screwed up and have used "excuses after excuses" - and now they have backed themselves into a corner!!!

 

Time they held their hands up and admitted how wrong they have been??

 

I am amused with them and their excuses because these people never ever bargained that they'd see a day where people had the courage to fight them back - and now they are floundering in a big way cause we are not having the "fob offs" :-D :-D

 

It's really time Mr M and his crew gave it up!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, they're in trouble - with the Banks! Aren't all of these purchased debts underwritten? If they've bought a load of white elephants, they won't have an income. Additionally, the comfy lifestyle they led before where nobody questioned what they did has collapsed.

 

They now find themselves with a huge overhead for administration costs just to administer / defend claims against them.

 

I'll give you tuppence in the pound.

 

Tide

 

 

I RECKON WE HAVE A CAG BUY OUT AND GIVE THEM A PENNY IN THE POUND!!

 

BUT DO WE BUY THE "RIGHTS AND NOT THE DUTIES" AND SHIRK OUR RESPONSIBILITIES?? :-D :-D :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All

 

I have cca'd Cabot not heard a thing, well over the time. My claim with Monument is awaiting their defence and I have asked them to remove the default as well as refund my charges. I was paying Cabot a token £1 a month but since they didnt supply me with the original agreement I have not paid them. Today I got a letter from Cabot saying that I had not paid them anything and they would take me to court. What is the best move now? It is Kingshill who are placing the default every month. Should I start a claim against Cabot or wait to see what happens with Monument? Also is there a letter I should send to Cabot to tell them they never supplied the original agreement? Thanks for your help.

 

Notty - let them try take it to court !!! This way it saves you the costs?? They'll file their claim with Hodsons Solicitors in Rugby more than likely (Hodsons bunk in with the messaging services people who keep pestering with phone calls)

 

If they do file a claim - write back to court telling them you already CCA'd Cabots etc.. and they haven't shown you anything to prove the original agreement etc.. - show court copies of any letters etc. that back up what you are saying.

 

This way you can ask court to intervene and ask Hodsons to prove the debt? Chances are they'll back off and be struck out of court for lack of evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So. This confirms that any money owed to me by Barclaycard must be paid BY Barclaycard as any burden cannot pass to the assignee, ie Cabot.

 

And if There IS a burden, then I'm guessing that there is nothing for Cabot to chase me for: in effect, Barclaycard have stitched up their mates, Cabot.

 

So. If I can't be bothered to collect from Barclaycard, then it's tough on Cabot. But if they really want the cash, it should really be Cabot chasing Barclaycard for the debt.

 

That's how I see it anyway. What about the rest of you intellectuals?

 

 

really?? I am going in there too!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vincent Cable MP (Lib Dem) has also been active against the banks, their cahrges and general ineptitude. Fantasy I'm happy to help you with this. Why not start a completely new thread for this and let's see who jumps on board. Tbern has already said he's in.

me too!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

:) Just got home to find a letter from Hodsons.....

 

It is their defence.. I have only had a quick flick through and they have done it again.

 

Honestly speaking, I am impressed you can see the effort that they have put into it. Sadly though, they have shot themselves in the foot. Some of the "facts" they have refered to are contradictory to the information in my SAR...

 

They have also made a few other little mistakes and have stated facts that I can can prove aren't true.

 

Biggest news though...... it is signed by WW himself, I finally have something from him, now I feel part of the gang

 

 

Priceless aren't they? :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are a bunch of comedians.. well at least they make me laugh anyway

 

No court date yet, but going by the contradictory defence they have filed I can't wait. I have a few documents to show the judge lol:cool:

 

 

Nice to see a "plan" coming together isn't it??? :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hah, you got easter eggs? I didn't get one. He who coughs all the time, despite all my hints would not put his hand in his pocket and spend. Typical bl--dy Yorkshire man. If he oopens his wallet it is the flight of the virginal killer moths...

 

 

aWW!!! MEN HUH!!! I didn't get an egg either - nobody lubs me!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...