help please with Cabot

[andrew1]

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

[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.

[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 ?

[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.

[andrew1]

I got a letter back confirming receipt of my letter for CCA.

 

They say they have contacted the Vendor and say it may take some time..

 

If we go by 12+2 on Wednesday should I keep paying my monthly payment? if I do, does it mean I acknowledge also please bear in mind that these lovely people screwed me and got a final charging order...

 

mmmm:cool:

 

I'm no whizz on FCO's but after the 12+2 you are entitled not to pay and they would need a court order to enforce the debt. The FCO is only (only!) a charge which would mean they would get paid when your house was sold so I suspect that if Cabot do not come up with the Original Credit Agreement to enforce the debt then you can apply to have the FCO removed as they would have had no right to put it on in the first place.

 

For the time being I would stop paying Cabot until they have the correct documents, BUT, I would strongly suggest that you keep what you have normally paid under the mattress so as not to get yourself in deeper trouble if the documents arrive and you have to continue paying.

[andrew1]

it would be very, very stupid to stop pauing a ccj just because they defaulted on a CCA request, especially if they have a charging order. remember, a charging order is a seperate covenant, and by presumption is enforceable.

 

You would be well advised to go for a set aside, instead.

 

Thanks TomTerm, I would hate giving out bad advice to anyone and I will stand by your better judgment on keeping paying, so my apologies to Joshua. My thoughts on this were based upon the fact that a ccj has been imposed where no Consumer Credit Agreement exists or cannot be supplied. How can a court issue a CCJ without sight of the original agreement? - I presume the debtor received a summons, didn't defend it and the court automatically issued the CCJ and thereafter the FCO. All this without a copy of the Original Agreement being seen?

 

If it then transpires that the Original Agreement is not forthcoming following a CCA request can the CCJ not be set aside, payments stop and some kind of restitution be made? Or am I being too overly optimistic?

 

I am aware of a situation where Geoffrey Parker Bourne for BOS have written to the debtor where a CCJ is in place and following a CCA request, stating that Quote " Our clients are not able to provide a copy of the signed agreement in this instance" ....blah de blah... " you have been paying and tried to settle the account so have accepted full liability etc please tell us how you are going to pay the balance.... The summons was never answered or a defence never put in because the debtor at the time was in no fit state health wise to respond.

 

..but without the Original Agreement surely this should never have reached CCJ stage?

 

I'd appreciate you views and it might point Joshua in the right direction. Again, thanks for correcting me and apologies to Joshua.

[andrew1]

Thanks tomterm, so a letter to Geoffrey Parker Bourne asking to provide details of what they relied on in court to have said CCJ allowed might not be appropriate?