help please with Cabot

[joshuaf1968]

I have been reading all of this with a great deal of interest. I am hoping to get some sound information and assitance if at all possible.

 

A little while ago sadly before I knew about CAG I was taken to Court by Cabot aka Kings Hill they got a CCJ and did not even ask for payments but went straight for a Charging Order I put in a defence but the judge gave them the CO.

 

Can I CCA these chaps? Is it worth it if I have defended the debt in Court? If there is no CCA then surely they cannot enforce can they?

 

The debt is made up of overdraft and credit card combined.

 

I do pay them monthly. Should I leave it or should I go for them?

[pmhcfc]

 

I do pay them monthly. Should I leave it or should I go for them?

 

Um, have you actually read any of the Cabot thread? If not, please do so and you'll have your answer

[joshuaf1968]

Thank You

I am pretty confident about the CCA so will send this off probably with a SAR also.

The part I cannot get to grips with is the fact that they have a CO and I have defended - do you feel I have admitted to the debt making me liable?

[pmhcfc]

Thank You

I am pretty confident about the CCA so will send this off probably with a S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) also.

The part I cannot get to grips with is the fact that they have a CO and I have defended - do you feel I have admitted to the debt making me liable?

 

You can always go for a 'set aside' - stating the fact that you was not aware of your rights etc etc etc ... Once of course you have CCA'd and SAR'd those lovely people at Cabot.

[joshuaf1968]

So...

 

1 CCA them

2 SAR them

if they do not produce CCA gain a set aside on the grounds of no CCA and I did not know my rights at the time and new evidence has come to light that is that they have no CCA (if that is the case of course )

I suppose a second attck could be that if they do have the CCA which is dated about 1995/6 there are tons of charges on the account so I could get those looked at I figure

[joshuaf1968]

Nope

just realised charges are no good as I am out of time

 

just the hope of no CCA etc

 

 

where there is hope...

[Rhia]

Not necessarily. If your account has been active within the past six years (which I suspect it must have if it has recently been sold off). then you can claim penalty charges. mis-sold ppi (if applicable) and if there is no proper agreement (and I don't mean the application form which they will fob you off with) in some circumstances it is possible to demand all of the interest ever paid back. Some are even claiming successfully beyond six years on this forum (you will have to search I don't have link).

Follow pmfc's instructions re SAR and CCA. However I would just check with the court as I think you can ask for disclosure as this is a live case under part 18 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Cabot and its coat of many companies will have to answer your questions if Judge rules and it may be a quicker way than the CCA and SAR but do that as well to show the court you have been taking action. Good luck and keep posting.

[joshuaf1968]

Many thanks for that I was under the assumption that the 6 year rule covered the time of the transaction - this opens up a whole can of worms for me then - I think they purchased this account towards the end of 2006 so I am gunning for them now. CCA and SAR off in the next day. The 'live' Court case is also of real interest - however to be safe if they do not have a CCA from 1996 ish then this is the best way forward to release the CO and the CCJ as they have enforced a debt they cannot legally show that they own. Am I on the right lines here?

[Rhia]

This has two sides to it. Go after the OC for penalties etc. For that you will need all your statements. You will probably have to take them to court to get them to refund but do not worry it is uite a well trodden path on here now. Do not let them tell you it has been sold etc. They must refund this to you and not to Cabot.

Then go for Cabot. No CCA apply for a set aside on these grounds. See who else will drop by with more experience than me on the latter. But defo start getting your penalties back.

[joshuaf1968]

OK

 

I have just pulled out the paperwork for this case...

 

The CCJ and final charging order were obtained in Feb 2007 and May 2007 by Kings Hill Ltd -

 

Any ideas whether the CCJ and CO are legitimate because they did not use their correct company names

[andrew1]

That's interesting - Kingshill (No 1) Limited were a Dormant Company from January 15th 2007 - tell us more...

[joshuaf1968]

OK

 

A slight correction from the above but it should not matter I think?

 

Kings Hill (No1) Ltd obtained a CCJ on me in March 2006

They had the case tranferred locally in Jan 2007

In May 2007 they obtained a Final Charging Order in the Name of Kings Hill (No1) Ltd

 

I am reading original Court Documents...:o

 

Since then I have made payments to them but have now sent a CCA request.

 

I sincerely doubt they can conjure up a CCA from one of the big banks - the debts relate to 1995-1999 ish

 

The 6 year rule would be of interest aswell, I must admit I am confused here..the purchases relate to that period above but if the bank sold the debt then does the clock start ticking again and I can claim the charges...

[joshuaf1968]

Does anyone have any comments about Kings Hill (No1) getting the FCO when they were a dormant company...

 

Is this an attack point for a set aside or should I just carry on down the CCA route..

[Seahorse]

I wouldn't read too much into getting it set aside on a minor technicality. Kings Hill now being Cabot UK, and all that. The CCA is the key. If there is no CCA, then there was never any enforcable debt in the first place. But it wouldn't hurt to mention the fact that the wrong company obtained the charging order.

[joshuaf1968]

Good advice thanks...

 

I could spend a deal of time and effort attacking a point that is clearly debatable, far better to go for the big fish (CCA) as this would wrap it up nicely...

 

thanks

[Seahorse]

[joshuaf1968]

Seahorse,

 

Any thoughts on the 6 year rule...the transactions go back to 95-99 ish is this still a possible claim others suggest that because the debt was sold then the clock starts again, I cannot get a steer on this point thanks

[andrew1]

It's not a matter of it being sold I don't think, it's about when you last made payment or effectively ' acknowledged the debt'?. Have you, in the last 6 yrs either paid anything or responded to correspondence or answered telephone calls about this debt. If you have then the clock starts all over again. If not it's statute barred and tell them to go to hell. Unless of course there was a ccj in place on the debt and I think that changes things. Someone else might be able to confirm that.

[joshuaf1968]

I have made payments since CCJ and FCO....

 

Prior to that I had possibly spoken to other DCA's...think I made a few payments 3-4 years ago....so there could be a debate there

 

The more I think about this and through the help of CAG I will be gobsmacked if they turn up with a 10-12 year old CCA - fingers crossed on this (I am rarely that lucky)..

[andrew1]

Yes, you're probably right, but don't forget you are dealing with Cabot. If they don't come up with the CCA, you can get the CCJ removed and if you have the bottle can go for the others before them and ask for your money back you paid them. Now wouldn't that be sweet ?

[Brassed off]

Yes, you're probably right, but don't forget you are dealing with Cabot. If they don't come up with the CCA, you can get the CCJ removed and if you have the bottle can go for the others before them and ask for your money back you paid them. Now wouldn't that be sweet ?

 

 

Hi Josh - am reading this thread with interest as I too have a CO on my house (not with Cabot!) and wasn't sure about going down the CCA/SAR route so will be following your thread to see how you get on:)

 

Good luck

 

Bo

[tomterm8]

OK

 

A slight correction from the above but it should not matter I think?

 

Kings Hill (No1) Ltd obtained a CCJ on me in March 2006

They had the case tranferred locally in Jan 2007

In May 2007 they obtained a Final Charging Order in the Name of Kings Hill (No1) Ltd

 

 

Now, the irony of this little fact, is your charging order was granted unlawfully. IIRC, Kings Hill No 1 changed its name on January 15th to Cabot Financial (Europe) ltd. Seahorse can confirm exactly whom.

[timewarp]

I would be so tempted to put in application to have the FCO removed....

 

Ohhhhh should you wait for the 30 days lack of CCA :-|

[timewarp]

if I were you JoshF I would take up my temptation but others may feel differently

[andrew1]

Now, the irony of this little fact, is your charging order was granted unlawfully. IIRC, Kings Hill No 1 changed its name on January 15th to Cabot Financial (Europe) ltd. Seahorse can confirm exactly whom.

 

Kingshill (No.1) Ltd actually changed its name on 15th January 2007 to Cabot Financial (UK) Ltd which was sitting dormant within their 'group' previously.not (Europe) Ltd Tomterm8. They just swapped names. Same company number just swapped names. Now Kingshill No1 Ltd sits dormant. (Europe)Ltd only act as 'administrators'.

 

This is why we get annoyed, (UK) Ltd BUY the debts & register the default, but never ever contact the alleged debtor. They pass the data about accounts they bought from the bank to another company cabot Financial (Europe) Ltd who then do all the chasing, harassing and corresponding with us all. But,they can't do this under the Data Protection Act without your permission - its as if they sent it to someone else altogether. Just because it is within the same 'Group' doesn't make it right, Cabot have got away with it for so long because they hide under this 'Cabot Financial' and 'Cabot Group' personna and they do it without having obtained any proof the debt exists (ie: with sight if the original Credit Agreement first). That makes it even worse. They are going to get thrashed over these once we have the final 'i's' dotted and 't''s crossed.