As I said they are the masters of bluff!!! Good on you for standing your ground, now try and get the CCA from HFC. I tried to get a CCA from HFC but apparently even after looking for nearly 3 years they can't find it!! Shame after all the nasty things that they said they were going to do to me!! Pookey

I got one of these ages ago, told Cabot it was illegible, so they sent me another exactly the same! I enlarged the big section of text above the signature box and sent it to them asking if they could tell me what it said. They must still be working on it as I have not heard from them for over six months! Pookey

Hi nilrs, Weightmans do tend to go in with all guns blazing, but in my case turned out to be the masters of bluff! I too had a Weightmans Statutory Demand hand delivered by a process server, which is not nice and is part of their plan to rack up the pressure. Don't panic (I know it is easy to say) this is what they want you to do so that you contact them and can be pressurised into some kind of settlement. They are only the DCA offshoot of a solicitors and as such will use all the usual DCA tricks. In my case they were relying on an unenforceable CCA (actually it was an MBNA application form). When you get the SD, phone the number contained on it and ask to speak to the person involved with its issue, this information is clearly displayed on the SD. If you cannot get hold of them try several times over several days noting the time and date each time, this will be useful should you apply for a set aside. You will probably get through with Weightmans though, when you do tell them that you are going to apply to have the SD set aside. They may ask you on what grounds, you do not have to tell them (especially as you do not have the CCA yet). This will let them know you are not a pushover and are going to put up a fight, and also that should you succeed it its going to cost them money! I was lucky, I already knew that that their 'CCA' was crap and when I phoned them I told them in no uncertain terms of this, the fact that I was going for a set aside and that it was going to cost them dearly!!! 20 minutes later I was contacted by the Section Manager who was extremely apologetic and grovelling, saying that there had been a terrible mistake and not to apply for a set aside so I gave him 48 hours to get a letter to me stating this. 24 hours later I received the letter saying that they had reviewed the case and in the circumstances had closed my file and passed the account back to their client. Put as much information up on your thread regarding this, people will help. The clock is also ticking regarding your CCA request, 12 days from it being delivered and they are in dispute and cannot proceed, and you can use this as grounds for a set aside. Good luck, Pookey

Nice to see Fairfax Solicitors is being economical with the truth. Judging by their listing with the law society it should be Fairfax Solicitor!!! As they only have one registered solicitor working for them. The Law Society - Find a solicitor I suggest addressing all enquiries direct to him as he is the legal brains, that should keep him busy!!! Pookey

I think the Banks got away with it for so long that they underestimated the power of the internet. With people being able to talk freely and check up information that before was quite difficult to access the Banks game was up!! It is quite amazing how long they have taken to rectify their agreements, I think they reckoned that customers would not dare question their 'authority'. The more public this becomes the more of a problem they will find themselves in, and unfortunately for them nobody trusts the Banks any more. Pookey

Good question Maybelate. I have been trying to find a definitive answer to this for a while. What happens if it is a 2 sided document with terms on one side and signature on the other? I have received an Egg Agreement which was like this, so when you get a copy you receive 2 pages, 1 with terms and 1 with a signature, but with nothing to link the 2 pages. So no way of verifying that they were indeed from the same document. Without the original how could it be proven in court that the 2 pages were linked? Pookey

Zazen.Warrior, I think this is where you have seen this response before, this time straight from Gordons LLP. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/192657-howard-cohen-oh-dear-5.html#post2313049 Funny how Gordons seem to get all the Howard Cohen complaints. As ODC said everyone with one of these letter need to complain individually (especially if they get a letter after the new procedure has been put in place). Once there are enough of the SRA responses that are identical, then there should be a mass complaint to the Legal Service Ombudsman. Pookey

Maxfan, If you are genuine they I feel very sorry for you, and think you should get yourself some legal advice rather than paying Marlin. For me though something doesn't ring true! You are in this position but have only 4 posts and no thread of your own on your case. If I was in the same position I would be all over this forum trying to get help. Indeed if you are a Marlin Troll I can tell you, and the rest of CAG, that Marlin/Mortimer Clarke are one of the most pathetic DCAs that exist. They are only capable of threatening people that do not know their rights. Once they know you are on to them they run away like the snivelling little bully that they are. Pookey

OH! I was going by posts on a shareholders BB (where there are some pretty twitchy investors in Cattles) rules regarding suspended share| Discussion| CTT| CTT.L| GB0001803666 | Cattles PLC - Interactive Investor Pookey

Hope they are useing Howard Cohen as their legal 'brains'.

Excellent news!! The monster has turned on itself and is trying to tear itself apart, lets hope it does. Countdown is on for 22 October 2009, if their share are not relisted by then (6 months from suspension), I believe the company has to be wound up. Pookey

I always ask my own security questions when they ring me!! I make them wait whilst I get the relevant folder then ask for their Company number and address of their registered office. Quite funny how many either won't or can't give this basic info and will keep on arguing that it is me that should be answering their questions. If it gets boring I accuse them of being the Phonejacker!! I count it as a win if they hang up on me - and I haven't lost yet!!! Pookey

Nice to see an MP on the receiving end!! We may just have found a very unlikely ally. Perhaps some letters to Miss Widdecombe sharing experiences, and asking what her party intends to do about it, especially if they are in power in the near future. Banning DCAs is a guaranteed vote winner!!! Pookey

They are going to need a bit more than what they will get for Cattles Invoice Finance:D UPDATE 1-Cattles bondholders demand immediate repayment| News| CTT| | | Cattles PLC - Interactive Investor I wander if they will use Howard Cohen as their 'legal brains' to get them out of this one!!!!!! Pookey

This is the address I used when I had to send a bemused letter, was signed for and I never heard from them again. Fredrickson International Ltd Persimmon House De Havilland Drive Brooklands Business Park Weybridge Surrey KT13 0NT Pookey

It doesn't take much to confuse me, but- When is statutory interest applied to a claim, and how does it work? My understanding was that it could be applied as simple interest (not compound) at 8% from the date of termination of the account until judgement was passed. Now this is where you are all going to laugh at me!!! What confused me was during the Dispatches program when 'Mark' from Marlin was talking about charging orders pointed to his screen and said 'We own 17 grand of that house, and it's going up 8% every year' Pookey

More recently the OFT has issued a notice that it is minded to impose requirements on Aktiv Kapital (UK) Limited and associated company Thames Credit Limited. Oh dear this could be embarrassing!!! Credit Today online Just in case the link doesn't work this is the news item - News Debt buyer backs CT Awards - 16/07/2009 Debt purchaser Aktiv Kapital is to become overall sponsor of the 2010 Credit Today Awards at the Grosvenor House Hotel in London. The Awards ceremony is the biggest night in the industry’s calendar, attracting around 1,400 of the most senior people in the sector. This year was the tenth anniversary of the scheme, which has gone from strength to strength. Hosted by Mock the Week comedian Dara O’Briain, the awards secured record entries and more than 70 companies were shortlisted for the gongs. Winners included: HSBC, British Gas, Lloyds Banking Group, Barclays, nPower, Orange and Bupa Wellness. Aktiv UK country manager David Sheridan said: "In this demanding environment, Aktiv Kapital is very pleased to confirm its commitment to celebrating industry and individual success by sponsoring the 2010 Credit Today Awards." Kamala Panday, publisher of Credit Today, added: "It is fantastic to have the support of Aktiv Kapital for the 2010 event. Aktiv has a strong international brand and has a long association with Credit Today. As a listed company, it offers a high level of transparency – a benefit in these times when the focus on the industry is intense. We look forward to working with Aktiv on the event." Pookey

Nice to see the 'Old Boy' network is alive and well in this country. Seriously I would contact Gordons LLP and request a signed copy of their official response to be sent to on company headed paper, at least then there will be a document of some standing that could be produced in the result of any further complaint about this practice. If they do not/will not send, then this will speak volumes about their 'investigation'.

I suppose Cohens decided they had won the case at these two dates and awarded their own costs:lol: There's no point worrying about a trial, the law or anything as outdated as that! I was actually told on the phone today by Cohens 'you started this action' I repiled 'no you put in the claim' to which they replied 'but you defended' Anyway I shall be writing to CL asking for a full breakdown, and sending a complaint to the OFT, trading standards and anyone else that people can recommend. I will also be taking the statement to Court to ask the Judge his opinion on Cohens cost they have awarded themselves before he/she has passed judgement. Pookey

Thanks BabyBear I was going to do that. This 'Statement' couldn't have come at a better time. I am just writing an amended defence to Howard Cohens 4th set of POCs for this case, this time they have the correct bank, date and account number for the alleged original account, all at the same time!!! Unfortunately for them the statement now confirms that they have the wrong balance and they believe they took over the account a few weeks before the date of assignment on the POCs. I am glad I have been able to defend on very easy points so far to give me some time, as I had until recently been off work since November 08 with depression, and this was not one of my priorities. I am ready for them now and feel I can address this properly and send them on their way! Pookey

Got it to work at last!! http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z191/spandexcocoleroy/CLstatement.jpg Does anyone agree this looks like the charges have already been added, even though it has yet to go to court? Thanks H&P, I do not phone as a rule but I wanted an immediate answer, I am immune to their threats now and never stray from what I want to say. Pookey

Hi, the other day I received a 'Statement of Account' from CL Finance with lots of charges and court fees added to the balance. I thought this was odd as this case has not come to court yet! I phoned CL and got put through to Howard Cohen, I said I want CL so got put through to Cohen again. This time I was told that HC deal with all CL's queries. I asked about the charges and was told 'that is to do with the CCJ we have served', I said 'that's odd we haven't had the trial yet!'. 'Oh yes, my mistake' he said and went to ask. I was told that they had to inform me of the cost of the legal action under CCA rules. I asked that if costs are not found against me in Court then I don't have to pay these charges, He confirmed this. My gripe is the way this has been presented as there is no explanation of this. It also seems a bit odd with the timing as I soon need to file a defence to HCs re amended, re amended, re amended POCs. I think they are trying to up the pressure!! Just going to fire up the scanner and I will post the 'Statement' Pookey

Sorry if this was taken seriously - was a reference to Bramber as in the name Marlin also uses as part of their debt collection strategy (as featured last night). http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/210264-bramber.html Forgot to put smiley faces on!!! A sorry but still frivolous Pookey

I think FunkyFox is right. To do this properly CAG should set up a fictitious sister website run by the same people and admin. Then we can all claim to be from the sister website when making these calls. Thus no comeback on CAG. I suggest Bramber.info (its available) Pookey

Just like their employees - lights are on but no one is home