it has been transferred by cabot to NI firm.

Please help any ideas on whether this would qualify as a properly executed agreement. This is all I have from my SAR to Cabot- can they reconstitute t&c's as they havent supplied them in my request? Is there anyone who has successfully defended against this type of credit card debt when this is all that has been produced? The card limit was increased from 6k to 10k, is there a legal obligation to sign a new agreement as suggested on the McGregor Moore website. On all Credit cards since 2007, there is an abundance of mail every time they change something like apr etc, prior to 2006, they just increased limits with out requests, the onus was to ring up and refuse the http://s1028.photobucket.com/albums/y350/Kazza_07/RBS%20ADVANTA%20MINT/?action=view&current=scan0001.jpg&evt=user_media_share

In my particular case with cabot - I have 2 agreements, one was a person loan through Capital Bank in Chester and the other an RBS advanta card. The PL had PPI included which I believe was mis-sold which even though this is over 6 years ago, I am still going to claim for because as cabot says, they assume all the responsibilities of the debt when they bought it. Now they have been unable to produce a copy of the default notice because RBS advanta have not got it on file, I wonder how much does this help my case and can they just now go and reconstitute documents after the Cary case? The copy of the app they sent me has just my name and address, no employment details so on what document were these? As this has now been stayed permanently in uk and dismissed, i wonder what all the significance of this will have if it goes to court in Northern Ireland?

PT - do you want me to remove the above which i found on Answers.com?

Thanks pt Under Section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act of 1974, creditors must give certain information to debtors regarding credit agreements that do not have a fixed sum for a fee of 1 pound, and penalties may be assessed if creditors do not provide that information. Responsibilities of Creditors Under Section 78 Creditors must provide to debtors the current state of their credit agreement, the amount that has already been paid and future due days for payments under the current credit agreement between the creditor and the debtor. Penalties for Creditors If the creditor does not give due dates for future payments within 12 working days of the request, then the agreement between the creditor and debtor may become "unenforceable." Unenforceable debt agreements still must be paid, but creditors cannot threaten legal action, demand early payments or repossess property on unenforceable agreements. Agreements Where Section 78 Does Not Apply Section 78 does not apply to non-commercial credit agreements, and creditors have more leniency with smaller agreements.

Hi all - is there any more information on the above won case by PT? On what basis was the case won, improperly executed agreement, illegible agreement, lacking T&C ect - any info would be very helpful. tia

Re: Newbie - Settling out of Court - is this the same case?

Have just been reading this case Alexandra Slater v Egg - The Full Judgement 10 Sep 2010 ... IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION MOLD DISTRICT ... in how to use the County Court - a must if you are intending to start a claim. ..... 10th September 2010 10:27 # ADS. Google search. Site Team Why do i read this as Egg won - everyone here is implying the claimant Slater won? am i nuts or what - to me the judge found infavour of Egg - please correct me if I'm wrong and point out where. TIA

Thanks Silverfox - appreciate the nudge. Is the lack of response because this involves a transfer to N.I. or just the holidays? hopefully some experienced CAG's can help. What Cabot has done is lump the two debts together, one the credit card RBS avanta and another which was a personal loan with PPI included. The total cost added to the loan was £1221 for the ppi back in 98, when I fell ill in 2000 and made a claim - wait for it - they said I wasn’t covered, wouldn’t pay out, now up to my eye balls in debt and fighting for survival to pay the mortgage I wasn’t the least pleased, however I struggled on before the whole thing overwhelmed me eventually. I then cancelled the ppi but only received a rebate of £236.24. The remainder I ended up paying. The loan was for 6k, i paid back 4.5k but with interest I still owed 5k plus and it was for this they are taking me to court. When I got back my copy of application form. its clear that this is a multiple agreement but the particulars of the loan are all lumped together with the loan, not stated separately. The balance of the ppi which I believe was mis sold at 8% pa would equate to £2k plus. Since Cabot claim complete ownership, they will be responsible for the mis-sold ppi and I should be counter claiming for the 2k. However, I need help and advice and any would be greatly appreciated.

Please Help – I have previously posted but need some serious advice on this one from experienced CAG members – rory32, vjohn82, scabhunter, curleybear or others. Thank you. This case may be of interest to those living in Scotland or Northern Ireland. Brief history In 2004 Cabot took over 2 debts I had, one a loan which included PPI from RBS and another from RBS Advanta. I at the time was doing my very best to avoid bankruptcy - despite been advised to go down that rout by all and sundry - and also was not aware of all the info regarding cca, sar etc so on my own set about trying to negotiate f&f settlements with my many creditors. After sending Cabot a f&f settlement cheque which they cashed, they had not agreed prior but I stipulated terms on the cheque, they cashed the cheque and continued to pursue me. Eventually in 2007 this went to NBCC, by this time I had found CAG, had completed a SAR and received back exactly what - sarajonsey - got and has uploaded in photo bucket - post 49 - a illegible copy of an application form - see http://s1028.photobucket.com/albums/y350/Kazza_07/RBS%20ADVANTA%20MINT/?action=view&current=scan0001.jpg&evt=user_media_share right down to the same date bar a few days. But I never receive a copy of the Default Notice, reading through the SAR communication, Cabot requested this from RBS who replied that they did not have it – reply from RBS “I cannot provide you wit a copy of default notice and the date is no longer on file “ I contested Cabot’s claim and on the 1 Sept 2007 the judge made the following direction:- It is ordered that 1 the action against the defendant be and is stayed as the contract for the supply of credit( and possibly other services e. g. insurance of goods after purchase) may fall within the special jurisdiction regimes in the judgments and Regulations and Convention 2 Any application to lift the stay shall be supported by evidence and authority 3 Any party affected by this order may apply to have it set aside varied or stayed such application must be made within seven days after the date when this order was served on the party applying 6 /07/07 That was that, I didn’t do anything and waited, then on 22 April 09, letter from Cabot regarding change of solicitor from Hodsons to Morgan. The a letter from Morgan’s seeking money on the 22 may 09 Then out of the blue on the 3rd august 09 -with no contact from the courts since 1st Sept 07 - a court letter stating Upon considering claimants application notice of the 26th May 09 seeking transfer of the case to N.I. and upon it appearing that there is no jurisdiction to transfer a case to another jurisdiction It Is Ordered that 1 Claimant’s application is dismissed 2 Unless by 1st Sept 09 there is an application to lift the stay in accordance with the order of District Judge xxxx of the 6.7.09 the claim be struck out without further order. ( I was not even aware such an action had been taken by Cabot? Is this allowed without me seeing any paperwork or did the court got the date wrong and it should have stated the 6/07/07 and not 6/07/09) 3 Any party affected by this order may apply within 7 days after service of it to vary, amend or to set it aside 6/06/09 All this after the Order on the 1 Sept 07 stating either party had 7 days to respond? Cabot then submitted an application notice on the 14th August with the following request:- Following an order of the court dated the 6th Aug 07, the matter was stayed. Accordingly, in order for the claimant to progress this matter they require the stay be lifted. ( on the 6th Aug 07 – the judge had given seven days – not 2 years – what significance is this, what is the point of stipulating 7 days if they can come back 2 years later and ask for the stay to be lifted?) On the 28th August the following Judgment was made:- It is ordered that 1 list application with a time estimate of 15 minutes 2 claimant shall file and serve authority that there has been proper service – CPR6.32 applies 28/08/09 – no mention of Cabot’s request to get the stay lifted, why? Hearing to take place 7th Oct 09 Then on the 7th Oct 09, I received a witness statement from Cabot – posted on the 6th Oct – notice there was obviously no time to respond and I would say this was a deliberate tactic by Cabot, stating that because proceedings were started in 07, cpr6.19 applied and not cpr6.32 and that the case be dismissed on the basis of jurisdiction – therefore allowing Cabot to reissue a new claim in N.I. with out an abuse of process occurring. It is submitted that this would be just and in accordance with the overriding objectives at cpr 1.1 ( no mention about stay been lifted, just want case dismissed so they can retake it ??? in another jurisdiction ) I also contested to the court that Cabot had now run out of time, had not provided me with proper documentation and the chances of success were slim at best and had no compelling legal basis to continue the claim. On the 7th Oct 09 the following Judgment was made It is ordered that 1 Application to lift stay is refused 2 The claim is dismissed, the court having no jurisdiction under the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgements act 1982 So I phoned the court about the 14th October 09 having heard nothing and the clerk told me what 'I thought' was good news – claim dismissed – so I thought happy days but I was wrong, just before Christmas a letter arrived form another solicitor now threatening court action here in N.I. Upon closer inspection of what the judge ordered, it appears Cabot got their wish and also they didn’t. On the 14th August they had submitted a request to get the stay lifted – that was refused, however, in their witness statement, they asked for the case to be dismissed so they could continue to hound me, this it appears on first sight they were granted. My question – where do I stand now – I feel let down by the whole court process as directions of 7 days from the judge seems to speak for nothing. At the time of my original defense, I diden’t understand the significance of a default order, can they pursue me with out one? The order to lift the stay – surly this means they cannot move this to a new jurisdiction as their request clearly stated that the reason they wanted the stay lifted was so they could restart the case in a new jurisdiction. A letter to the OFT could be in order – any advice again appreciated All help would be greatly appreciated. M69

Hi I am worried about your statement - "I am not afraid of a sale being forced as this is something that could never happen" You say you have a ccj registered, that means that your creditor can now go back to court and get a charge on your property which could potentially result in a forced sale. This is following on from you saying that you offered a voluntary charge on your property which would mean that you obviously must have it in your name to be able to offer the charge. My point is to be vigilant and as suggested above, start looking for any opportunity which might enable you to go back to court to challenge the ccj. To get legal aid in N.I. the rules are very simple, unless you can prove your combined income is somewhat shy of £10000.00 or you are on Job seekers allowance, legal aid will not be granted. previously legal Aid would be automatically granted if you were in receipt of FWT credits but not anymore so beware of the income limits when filling out any legal aid application forms. They will also require copies of your bank statements, Rates bill and income/expenditure as wells as your last set of accounts. You might as well get all of these together now as they will be looking for them any how. First challenge the legality of the ccj as this is an absolute priority. Good Luck

Hi Herbie Congratulations and well done for your persistence - Cabot are bullies, they try to intimidate and make the ordinary man/woman feel as if they a little more than idiots. If you can please post final details of how and why the Judge came down in you favour and what you used as a final defence, this would be most useful. I am currently in a major battle with Cabot that goes back to 2004 for 2 cca in total 15k. In 2007 I went to court and the Judge ordered a stay and asked for further evidence from cabot to counter my arguments. One loan had ppi from 99 and the other was credit card. my arguments were based on misselling of ppi +missing prescribed terms from the copy of the application form they supplied me with under a sar. Cabot went back to court this year and asked for the stay to be lifted, almost 2 years after original stay direction. again went to court, judge refused to lift stay and set another date for oct 7th. I again submitted a further defence and asked judge NOT to life stay. The judge refused to to agree with Cabot and refused to lift stay. Cabot were represented in court, I was not. this is all good news, however, Cabot may appeal or take this to a higher judge. my case is still only stayed, not dismissed so obviously I still have possibly a fight to contend with. Hence I would love to hear how you won. tia

OFT Update. I am sure that this has peen posted somewhere. *June 2009 Update* *The OFT's Review of the use of Charging Orders by its Licensees* As noted above, due to the reported rise in numbers of charging orders being granted the OFT has conducted a wide-ranging review of the use of charging orders as a method of enforcing judgment debts, where the debts originally arose under regulated consumer credit agreements. The interim results of this review indicate that there may be potential problems with the way in which some creditors use charging orders as part of their debt enforcement activities. The OFT will be working with licensees to ensure that consumers are not the subject of what we would consider unfair business practices in relation to the use of charging orders and orders for sale. The OFT expects its licensees to accord with all relevant legislation and guidance when conducting debt enforcement proceedings. The OFT will take appropriate action where it finds business practices that fall below the standard expected of licensees. ***************

http://personal-debt-management.suite101.com/article.cfm/charging_orders_a_threat_to_some_debtors

Hi Lost cause I'm sorry to hear of your situation, thats one of the reasons I have set up the below petition, please sign and get your friends to do so, we have got to put a stop to people loosing their home over unsecured debt. Regarding redundancy money, your no one priority is you, that means you, you have got to survive, you and your family come first. if you get redundancy money, its not a lump sum to be thrown away to some greedy people who don't really give a dame about you or your family. i personally would be using my money to protect and defend your current situation and would not put it were someone one can seize it with out your permission if you get my drift. Go to the CAB first thing Monday or as soon as possible and get some legal advice but remember, if the money lies in a bank account, it can be seized. Good luck. Please go to and sign - every little helps http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Charging-Orders/

This is fantastic news illy white re your recent post. IN THE LEEDS COUNTY COURT Case No: 9LS70096 The Combined Court Centre Oxford Row Leeds 1st June 2009 Before HIS HONOUR JUDGE LANGAN QC __________ BANK OF SCOTLAND (Claimant) -v- ROBERT MITCHELL (Defendant) __________ APPROVED JUDGMENT __________ APPEARANCES: For the Claimant: MISS GARDNER For the Defendant: MR BERKLEY QC This case can be used as a reference point. Well done to everyone and keep the good fight up. Please sign this petition - time is running out – http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Charging-Orders/

Sorry - completely disagree - why take out unsecured debt at a hugh rate of interest if it then can be secured at a later date. The rate of interest reflects the risk - Unsecured = high risk = high rates of interest secured = lower risk = lower rates of interest No way and how do you know what will happen regarding the law? The truth is you dont and Petitions are a method of creating awaraness about the subject. You want the consumer to be screwed both ways? The consumer gets screwed enough - time to fight back. Please sign this petition - time is running out – http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Charging-Orders/

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Charging-Orders/

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Charging-Orders/

Dear friends - this is serious, imagine someone has gone guarantor for a son or daughter and they defaulted on the loan, potentially this could end up in court with the guarantor, that might be you, loosing their home - please sign this and get your friends and family to do likewise. Debt problems can hit anyone at any time, the future is not predictable and why live with the risk? The law can be changed. This does not mean that one should ignore their debt obligations, the opposite is true but you must look out for your self, if you dont who will? sigs so far 24 and rising, lets hit 50 by the end of 1st of July - go - go

Charging orders: How your home can be used to settle debt | This is Money Check this out:- Homes can be seized for credit card debt Alan O'Sullivan, This is Money 11 November 2008http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/credit-and-loans/dealing-with-debt/article.html?in_article_id=456909&in_page_id=62

Please support this petition. This could affect you! Did you know that you can actually loose your home over unsecured debt of as little as £1000 by the loan company obtaining a charging order against your home. That would be an extreme case but once a charging order is in place, the creditor has the legal power to commence proceeding against you which could result in you loosing your home. This does not have to be you, it could be a son or daughter or friend. Anyone in fact can find themselves in this position. Please pass on this to all your friends and acquaintances. The recent expenses scandals prove it is You and I that get screwed when the chips are down- no more – its time to fight back – that time is now. Charging Orders A Charging Order is a way of enforcing a previously unsecured debt by securing it against a debtor’s property. The charge will be the amount that is owed by the debtor. Since 2000 there has been a colossal 722% rise in the number of Charging Order applications by unsecured creditors (CAB 25/6/2009). Read this Link - What Vince cable of the Lib Dems has to say on the subject. http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/credit-and-loans/dealing-with-debt/article.html?in_article_id=456909&in_page_id=62 Stop this Now – This is grossly unfair and creditors are now running to the courts to seek charging orders to protect themselves. You need to protect you - Please sign this petition - time is running out - http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Charging-Orders/ The law need to be changed to stop this practice. Unsecured Debt when taken out is exactly that and the risk is reflected in the interest rate charged. Creditors cannot be allowed to have it both ways – Protect your home Stop this unfair practice and sign this petition today - we can do this together. :idea: Homes can be seized for credit card debt www.thisismoney.co.uk/credit-and-loans/dealing-with-debt/article.html?in_article_i d=456909&in_page_id=62Alan O'Sullivan, This is Money 11 November 2008

Did you know that you can actually loose your home as a result of getting a charging order taken out against you over unsecured debt for as little as £1000. That would be an extreme case but once a charging order is in place, the creditor has the legal power to commence proceeding against you which could result in you loosing your home. Charging Orders A Charging Order is a way of enforcing a previously unsecured debt by securing it against a debtor’s property. The charge will be the amount that is owed by the debtor. Since 2000 there has been a colossal 722% rise in the number of Charging Order applications by unsecured creditors (CAB 25/6/2009). Stop this – This is grossly unfair and creditors are now running to the courts to seek charging orders to protect themselves. You need to protect you - Please sign this petition - time is running out - http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Charging-Orders/ The law need to be changed to stop this practice. Unsecured Debt when taken out is exactly that and the risk is reflected in the interest rate charged. Creditors cannot be allowed to have it both ways – Protect your home Stop this unfair practice and sign this petition today - we can do this together.

That is the whole point of this petition, we need reform of the law to stop charging orders being used to turn unsecured debt into secured debt. This is a serious issue for everyone who finds themselves in a debt situation. This practice must be stopped, keep signing, if necessary a new tread and another petition will be necessary - this could effect those who are not directly in debt themselves but who have gone guarantor for possibly a son or daughter. Do you really feel some one should loose their home for a 2k or 5k or even 10k debt? Once a charging order is in place, the legal right exists to bring forward the process of forcing a sale of the family home, it doest follow that this will automatically happen but this is the whole point of getting the debt secured - the creditor has just screwed you again. Keep signing, we need to find another way, protect your home, lobby your mp, this is serious. http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/REPOSSESSIONS/ I have just applied to No10 to start a new petition - once set up, please help to get as many signatures as possible, we most definitely need more than 500 to be of any consequence, possibly as many as 10000. when working together, everything is possible, just look at what CAG have achieved and is going on achieving.

When defending your position, its worth checking this out. Mishcon de Reya, Solicitors, London : News and Events : Articles : Judgment: Basil Rankine vs American Express Services Europe Limited these guys make all sorts of claims on there website, now they are saying they can buy your debt, of course you pay them and they say they will then take it on and release you of your obligations. Is this possible that one can legally do this? In the above good info on the cca1974 from the Judge.