Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • FTMDave
      VCS SpyCar PCN now Claim Form - No Stopping - Bristol Airport

      By FTMDave · Posted

      See what you think of the attached. I have to do some proofreading of an English grammar book for an Italian publisher this weekend - for money! - so I'm afraid corrections and suggestions will come in dribs & drabs.  I've totally knackered the layout, the numbering and the order of your Exhibits but there will be several versions done so don't worry about that ATM. Your arguments are superb. What is less superb is the way you jump from one to the other and back again, so I haven't changed your words, but I have moved the paragraphs around and given each section a heading. New bits are shown in red. Crossed out crossed out in black is something you've quoted from the government Code of Practice, but that has since been withdrawn so unfortunately that argument has to go. Your paras 7 & 8 don't harm your case but to me are waffle and can go.  Keeping the arguments clear & concise will always impress a judge. IMPORTANT - did you ever send Simple Simon a CPR request? Defendant's WS - version 2.pdf
    • NewsBot
      ABBA star Bjorn Ulvaeus makes AI warning during Bridlington visit

      By NewsBot · Posted

      Björn Ulvaeus appeared on stage in East Yorkshire at a conference held at the Bridlington Spa.View the full article
    • slick132
      HMRC seek repayment after Fast Tax Rebates Ltd take most of rebate

      By slick132 · Posted

      Hi Schipoo and thanks for the update. This is a brilliant result as rergards your fight with HMRC. If you can manage a Donation to the site, it would be greatly appreciated. Let us know how it goes as regards the fees being sought by Independant Tax.
    • tobyjugg2
      The Power Of Nature.Wild Weather.Climate Change.

      By tobyjugg2 · Posted

      A never ending torrent of **it Outrage as ‘tidal wave’ of sewage floods historic market town’s unique chalk river WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK Exclusive: Water firm pumps sewage into river Misbourne, Amersham on 21 ‘dry days’ during nearly five month period  
    • Rob Carr
      HMRC seek repayment Maxwell and FTR Ltd

      By Rob Carr · Posted

      Worth noting that all of these firms - either the alleged EIS investment, the rebate company themselves or the payee were all registered to the same address. Clavering House is 3 miles away from HMRC Benton Park view offices.   Wardrop - unfortunately unsuccessful due to late appeal - assessments opened by HMRC in March 2019. Scammed by Richard Hall (Capital allowances consultants ltd - Clavering House) investments into Cryoblast Limited 15/16 (Paul Huggins - Clavering House) and Eco Cooling solutions 16/17 (Anthony Fitches - Clavering House).    Mccuminsky - scammed by Capital Allowances after providing his details to Stefan Brown Alpha Tax Consultants (Clavering House) payment made to Eco Cooling Solutions.    Robson - scammed by Capital Allowances - 15/16 paid to Cryoblast 16/17 paid to Eco Cooling.    Myself - scammed by Allan Maxwell - MaxTax (other business Maxwell electronics) registered to Clavering House.   Cryoblast Solutions and Fast Tax - Alan O’Hara    Please note there are two Cryoblasts involved - Cryoblast limited (Paul Huggins and Clavering House) and Cryoblast Solutions Limited (Alan O’Hara also director of Fast Tax).    My return simply said “Cryoblast” another thing that should have been clarified as part of HMRC guidelines before paying out the claim.    Cryoblast limited was already suspected to be involved in fraudulent claims before my investment as Huntly had open assessments issued in November 2018.    Cryoblast Solutions, the same company director as Fast Tax where my money was sent was dissolved before my claims were submitted. 

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

No Defence from Monument but Cabot defaulting

Notty

By Notty
in Debt Collection Agencies

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6201 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

Notty

Notty

Posted
Posted

Monument had until the 16th May to enter a defence but they havent sent anything to the court, checked today. I know I can now request judgment but my poc is for charges and the removal of a default. Monument (Barclays) sold my account to Cabot and it is Cabot who have been entering the default on my cra. I did a cca on Cabot and they said because they are the legal owner of the debt and the rights were assigned to Cabot the duties were not. This means they are still entitled to collect? Not sure what to do next. I know if I request judgment Monument will probably pay up but not get the default removed. Someone suggested writing to Cabot again asking them to remove the default but they havent even bothered to answer. If Monument cant or wont remove the default becuase Cabot have to do it should I issue the N1 for the removal of the default or should I send them the S10 notice and maybe use Surly Bonds letter? Any ideas?

Link to post
Share on other sites
tbern123

tbern123

Posted
Posted

Sorry Notty, not really sure on this one.

 

From what I have read, the default would have been registered by the OC and DCA's only keep it updated. On this basis if you force the OC to remove the default, there will be nothing for the DCA to update

Remember if you find anything I say helpful, please click the scales

 

 

tbern123 vs Cabot

  1. Cabot again !!! Urgent Help Needed
  2. Litigation - tbern123 V Cabot Financial (Uk) Limited
  3. No more calls from Cabot... lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
Notty

Notty

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks tbern. So could I refuse to settle the court case with Monument and make them remove the default as part of the claim?

 

I thought that if the DCA now owned the debt then it was them that kept the default going. I didnt realise it is the OC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
tbern123

tbern123

Posted
Posted

Neither the DCA or OC keep it going.. That is all down to the CRA's..

 

When I have asked Cabot why they put a default on my file, they say they didn't they are just updating it.

 

However, under the LPA Cabot do have the right to remove the default from your credit file..

 

Sorry I think I am just confusing the issue.. Come on guys, someone help Notty with this

Remember if you find anything I say helpful, please click the scales

 

 

tbern123 vs Cabot

  1. Cabot again !!! Urgent Help Needed
  2. Litigation - tbern123 V Cabot Financial (Uk) Limited
  3. No more calls from Cabot... lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
Notty

Notty

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Anyone any ideas which to go? Cabot to remove the default with N1 claim or S10 and Surly Bonds letter? Would really appreciate any help is this is the last default on my credit file. I have managed (with the help of this site) to get 3 defaults removed but I am just at a loss what to do with Cabot- HELP!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
bed32

bed32

Posted
Posted

Surely if you get judgement against them that will include an order for them to remove the default?

 

I'd get that and then send it off to the various CRAs to see how they react. I imagine they should remove the default based on the order (on the grounds that it demonstrates that the default is not lawful)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Notty

Notty

Posted
  • Author
Posted

It doesnt seem to work like that. I had a judgment against BOS but the court ignored the default part and just told them to pay the charges. BOS had already done by paying it off the balance on my account. They could then write to the court and tell them its settled. I have written to the court telling them my claim (BOS) was in two parts. The court have now sent me the N244 form. I now have to pay £35 to amend the request for judgment form but it already had the default removal as part of my claim. I am sure Monument will do the same thing. Pay the charges but not remove the default. You then seem to come to a brick wall. That is why I wondered if I could get Cabot to remove the default. They seem to keep updating the default but I dont know how to go about it? Is it the LBA and then the N1 claim form and should I send the s10 notice and SB's letter. They have not supplied the agreement under the cca.

Link to post
Share on other sites
bed32

bed32

Posted
Posted

I suppose you could send a copy of the judgement to the CRAs - using it as evidence that the charges were unlawful. If they don't remove the default then you could go to ICO - that might be easier than going back through the courts.

 

Or s.10 the CRAs

Link to post
Share on other sites
Notty

Notty

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I had a letter from Monument today saying they would pay the charges but never mentioned the default. They want me to sign a form to say I agree to their conditions. I emailed them and told them I would sign the form when they had paid the money to me and also removed the default. They emailed me back and said once I had sent the form back they would pay me and try and get Monument to remove the default. I again told them when they removed the default and paid the money to me I would sign the paper and return it to them. I also pointed out that my particulars of claim on the N1 claim form included the removal of the default and if I had to enter judgement against them I would make sure the judge was aware of this fact. Do you think that was the correct thing to do or would I have been better sending the form back first?

Link to post
Share on other sites
tomterm8

tomterm8

Posted
Posted

I am no longer welcome on CAG

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Notty

Notty

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The letter said that they did not agree with my legal analysis but because the amount was relatively modest they wuold pay as it was not cost effective for either party to take the matter to trial. The default amount is £900 and the charges are £650. They offered the £650 back as full and final settlement but it must be kept confidential by me. They said (in their email not the letter) that if it was showed the default was caused becuase of charges they would try and remove it but I had to sign and return the form first. The problem is if I do that I havent got a leg to stand on have I if they dont then remove the default? Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Josie8

Josie8

Posted
Posted
Monument had until the 16th May to enter a defence but they havent sent anything to the court, checked today. I know I can now request judgment but my poc is for charges and the removal of a default. Monument (Barclays) sold my account to Cabot and it is Cabot who have been entering the default on my cra. I did a cca on Cabot and they said because they are the legal owner of the debt and the rights were assigned to Cabot the duties were not. This means they are still entitled to collect? Not sure what to do next. I know if I request judgment Monument will probably pay up but not get the default removed. Someone suggested writing to Cabot again asking them to remove the default but they havent even bothered to answer. If Monument cant or wont remove the default becuase Cabot have to do it should I issue the N1 for the removal of the default or should I send them the S10 notice and maybe use Surly Bonds letter? Any ideas?

 

Under contract law they annot just assume the rights without the duties of the contract

You may receive different advice to your query as people have different experiences and opinions. Please use your own judgement in deciding whose advice to take.

 

If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional. Any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability.

 

If you think I have been helpful PLEASE click the scales

 

court bundles for dummies

Link to post
Share on other sites
tbern123

tbern123

Posted
Posted
Under contract law they annot just assume the rights without the duties of the contract

 

Hello Josie, I would really appreciate it if you could elaborate further on your post as Cabot repeatedly tell people that they rights but not the duties were assigned

Remember if you find anything I say helpful, please click the scales

 

 

tbern123 vs Cabot

  1. Cabot again !!! Urgent Help Needed
  2. Litigation - tbern123 V Cabot Financial (Uk) Limited
  3. No more calls from Cabot... lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
MoonHawk

MoonHawk

Posted
Posted

I always find it helpful to look at the definitions in Acts they are very enlightening :)

 

The definition of "Creditor" in the CCA 1974 is:

189 Definitions

“creditor” means the person providing credit under a consumer credit agreement or the person to whom his rights and duties under the agreement have passed by assignment or operation of law, and in relation to a prospective consumer credit agreement, includes the prospective creditor;

 

Its says 'and duties' not 'or duties'. As far as I am aware the definition has not changed CCA 2006.

 

In my view, as far as the law is concerned they assume the role of creditor in it's entirity when they aquire a debt. I would write to them and say that you are awaiting their compliance and give them the deadline. You can also say:

 

You are reminded that, under section 189 of the CCA 1974, you are obliged to supply these documents, whether you are the original creditor or not.

 

Warn them that they will request the OFT to invetigate them.

 

Best Wishes

MoonHawk

I think it would be a good idea.

Mahatma Gandhi when asked what he thought of Western civilization

 

Advice & opinions of MoonHawk are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability.

Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you have any doubts.

 

Lloyds TSB - Unlawful charges - Settled £8,807.68

Motor Help UK - Misrepesentation Act - Settled £111.25 (Thread Here)

Next Directory court action without a CCA for £605 - Settled & account closed (Thread Here)

CABOT - Can not produce CCA and refusing to accept it - In progress

Aktiv Kapital - Can not produce CCA and also refusing to accept it - In progress

Barclaycard - Can not produce CCA for an account of £2,000. After a long fight used CPR - Settled

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Josie8

Josie8

Posted
Posted
Hello Josie, I would really appreciate it if you could elaborate further on your post as Cabot repeatedly tell people that they rights but not the duties were assigned

 

section 189 of the Consumer Credit Act

 

“creditor” means the person providing credit under a consumer credit agreement or the person to whom his rights and duties under the agreement have passed by assignment or operation of law, and in relation to a prospective consumer credit agreement, includes the prospective creditor;

 

Sorry for delay in responding have been in hospital

 

You may receive different advice to your query as people have different experiences and opinions. Please use your own judgement in deciding whose advice to take.

 

If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional. Any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability.

 

If you think I have been helpful PLEASE click the scales

 

court bundles for dummies

Link to post
Share on other sites
Notty

Notty

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I got the lady from Barclays to agree to move the default and pay back the charges (Monument). This was over 2 weeks ago. I had to sign a letter and send it back which I did but I put on the letter that I only agreed to the settlement if they removed the default as well as pay me the charges (they wanted to pay it back to the Monument account although they have sold it on to Cabot? Anyway they still havent removed the default, and repaid the charges. Do you think I should just go ahead and request judgement and let the court sort it out, although that is a bit of a joke! The lady from Barclays said she has been chasing Monument but it is out of her hands now. Yes sure it is. Any advice kind folks?

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...