Likely a trading name of Cabot, I think that is the street on which the business is situated from memory.

The good news is that your executed is likely unenforceable, I had to fight big time and get trading standards involved to get a copy of my executed agreement. Mine is from 1998, and surprise surprise. Missing prescribed terms which would deem the executed agreement unenforceable under the Consumer Credit Act. It's a pain living with the default on your credit file, but that said, i'd prefer not to bow to a bunch of shisters. But as with all these things it's your choice in which course of action to do. Moorcroft will try to intimidate and harass you, say that they may take you to court, anything to put you in a state of fear. But as they do not own the account I don't believe they could instigate any action, that would be upto the creditor who is now Cabot. If Cabot were to proceed with action, you could request to view the original executed agreement (and take a copy for any defence). It's unlikely they'll get it out of Citi, and if they did they'd find it's unenforceable.... and theres your ammunition. If you feel harassed by their phonecalls, write to them stating that you've complained to the OFT, and do it, if that doesn't work contact your local Trading Standards. Failling that I can do you a good letter, more than used to dealing with DCA tactics. There's a large group of us here who help one another, if you need anything just give one of us a shout.

I was always of the belief that sending out a Default Notice was a necessary legality to be able to mark an account as "Defaulted". Essentially to allow the account holder enough time (should they choose) to pay arrears to bring the account back into the black. I.e. No default notice, no lawfully registerred default against the account. But as many of us Citi customers know from experience, this company does not deal in a fair and honest manner if it is not to their benefit. An example from my dealings with them, being told in writing that the Terms & Conditions were the executed agreement by the then Data Controller.... which obviously is not the case. With regard to assignment, whilst I have found no direct mention of it as yet, I believe the onis would be for the original creditor to inform the account holder. Followed by the new creditor to make themselves known. 1st Credit in my case provided me with a lovely photoshopped piece of paper with all the Citi details, shame that the registered company address hadn't been used for 8 months, it had the 1st Credit barcode included, used the Sunderland address which was Citi's loan business and not credit cards, arrived in a 1st Credit envelope. (Of course they never admitted to their artistic efforts). Ultimately DCAs purchase accounts for between 10%-15%.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?280752-Cabot-Citi-Fan-Club%281-Viewing%29-nbsp

Thought i'd start a sticky for those of you in the same boat who have recently had their accounts sold to Cabot. A place to provide an exchange of idea's.

I have it on good authority that Citi don't issue termination notices, likewise they can be hit and miss with their default notices. I'm thinking of making a Mini-Cabot Fan Club thread and stickying it here, so that those in the same boat can help one another.

The way that Citi used to do it, was provide the details you entered on your application form, just plain text and not a copy of the form itself. You have to ask yourself, why go to the trouble of typing that information out when providing a copy of the form would be much quicker. As with Citi in much of their dealings, don't expect them to ever be straight forward with you. If Citi was still the creditor at the time you submitted your SAR request, they were still obliged to send you a copy/or at least the details. Me thinks they were trying to wriggle off the hook with that one.

Standard DCA practice in my experience, ignore any disputes raised, and continue as normal by trying to instill a sense of fear (i.e. the text "move your account to the next stage"), uncertainty and harass an account holder. These companies are bottom feeders, normally they'll purchase an account for 10-15% of the balance and then try and claim the full amount, if they meet resistence they'll tempt you by offering you 30-40% off the full balance. Anything to make money. It might be an idea to read or printout this, it's pretty invaluable when dealing with such companies, the OFT Debt Collection Guidance: http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft664.pdf First of all phonecalls, if you have no wish to talk to them do not answer there security questions, simply answer "No" when they ask you to confirm them. You don't have to comply with them in anyway if you don't want, it's your choice, you are the one with the power. (I would get into what money really is, which is empowering, but thats maybe for another time) Should they ignore your letters in which you have expressed that you do not wish to be contacted by phone, and there calls are frequent (i.e. could amount to harassment) they'll normally stop if you say that you'll report them to the Office Of Fair Trading, and follow through with the threat if they persist. Enquiries and Reporting Centre Office of Fair Trading Fleetbank House 2-6 Salisbury Square London EC4Y 8JX. If that doesn't do the trick, Trading Standards has the ability to prosecute them under the Administration Of Justice Act 1970. Get in touch with your local trading standards department and request their assistance. Type your postcode into the following site for your local TS department: http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/advice/index.cfm With regard to your letter stating that the "account is in dispute" if they have signed for it, they have received it. I would be tempted to sit tight and see what threat they make next - there are a lot of people in the same boat with Cabot so I would make contact with others in the same boat and you can help one another should the need arise. Alternatively you could contact Cabot stating that you refer them to your letter of xx/xx/2010 (insert date) in which you stated that the account was in dispute, and is confirmed as being received and signed for on xx/xx/2010 (insert date). I would like to reaffirm that I would like all future contact in writing only as I have no intention of discussing these matters over the phone, should you decide to ignore such request there is cause for complaint with the Office Of Fair Trading or Trading Standards. Additionally I withdraw the implied right of access for any visit to my property, meaning that any such visit would consitute unlawful trespass. "The only response I had to my CCA request from Citi was the letter a few people got that said they don't have to send me a CCA as they are not chasing the account etc etc" Interesting, myself and a number of others (the_shadow) received this letter as well. It's funny as such a statement in respone to a s78(1) CCA request is legally binding (I forget the section though can look). No doubt they continued to add interest and charges after you put the account into dispute, and received the said letter. Cause enough for complaint/dispute, but standard Citi procedure in my experience. If you have household insurance, normally you can get legal insurance in with the policy. These normally provide upto £1 million of cover to have legal representation to provide a defence which could be handy if needed. I don't think Cabot will go to court in these cases though, as if they instigated a claim you can file a CPR 31.16 to view the original executed agreement. My belief is that Citi have a lot of problems with their executed agreements (i.e. signed contracts) hence why they have doggedly resisted giving out copies to customers. Certainly in my personal instance Trading Standards secured the release of mine, and surprise, surprise missing prescribed terms - that rendered it unenforceable. If a claim was forthcoming, you could take a copy of any executed agreement as they would be reliant on it to seek an enforcement order if the alleged debt is not acknowledged. We can then study it. Should it not be legally compliant (missing prescribed terms) then any defence could include this as a defence, a court is precluded from making any enforecement order if the executed agreement was signed prior to April 2007 by virtue of the Consumer Credit Act. If in the unlikely event it is compliant then it would be time to reach an arrangement with the creditor before it reaches county court. In this process we have never been seeking to "avoid debt" as it was termed to me on one occasion. We are seeking to see whether the executed agreement is properly executed, in the instance it is not the agreement/contract is next to useless, allowing the account holder a lot of scope to reach a mutually agreeable resolution to the account. Always keep in mind that Cabot paid 10-15% of the balance to purchase it. Banks also have the capacity to create money from nothing through their balance sheets, and with use of fractional reserve lending. Hope this info is of help. And most importantly don't worry, don't let them instill fear, it's time that people took their power back.

If they were to go to court you could submit a CPR31.16 to view the original executed agreement, something that you have been keen to view since the start of this whole issue. The creditor would be seeking to gain an enforcement order on the basis of it, if you have not acknowledged the alleged debt they believe it due. In this process you have not been seeking to avoid the alleged debt, more to see whether the executed agreement (aka signed contract) is properly executed and legally complaint i.e. includes all the prescribed terms. In the instance that it is not, then it gives you scope to come to a mutually agreeable arrangement with the creditor. In the instance that the executed agreement is fully legally complaint and includes all the prescribed terms then likewise you can come to an arrangement with the creditor. The sticking point is that since the very start, years before the recent test case, Citi have doggedly resisted sending out copies of executed agreements which would leave me to believe something is up. Certainly in the instance of mine Citi did not have a legally complaint executed agreement.

I was of the opinion that all rights and duties transfer to whoever the creditor was, which would include Citi, and maybe now Cabot. That said if your complaint started when the account was with Citi, and effectively they've sold it to escape the said rights and obligations it could be a point that the FOS may highlight.

If they are now the creditor, they should be forwarding the request to the original creditor -- as a previous customer they will have nothing to do with you.

As with all these things, it's up to you as to what course of action you take. They would have to have a fully compliant executed agreement to seek an enforcement order -- so if action was to happen you would file a CPR 31.16 request to view the original executed agreement. As far as I know Citi is not providing these (or copies of them to any parties), either their customers or third parties such as DCAs that purchase accounts.

Best to keep in touch with one another, as you'll be able to support one another. From the perspective of too many phone calls, or threats of visit let me know as have combatted many a DCA trying this on. Someone said to me a while back that Citi does not issue "Notice Of Assignments" as they are meant to legally transfer ownership of accounts. Normally it's left to the DCAs to magic something up, as happened in my instance with 1st Credit. I'd imagine that Citi would issue them on there coloured stationary for starters -- which doesn't appear to be the case with these. Just thought of something which might help as well, but will PM you all later on.

Laura Cooke and Dollydimples have also had their accounts sold to Cabot, I would suggest getting in touch with those members as well.

Theres another person who has PMd me that has had their account sold to Cabot, will give you their username if you want -- as you both appear to be in the same boat. Might be an idea to familiarise yourself with how Cabot operate by looking at other threads on here. Any problems with harassment by phone, then I would suggest writing to the OFT and Trading Standards - and letting Cabot know you will be doing it. (PM me if you have problems). Likewise in the unlikely case they take you to court, your can submit a CPR31.16 request to court to view the original executed agreement -- which Cabot would be seeking an enforcement order on the basis of.

I will enquire with heads that are wiser than mine. If there is a default registered against the account, after 6 years it should drop off your credit file. If you have not received a proper "Notice Of Assignment" then its interesting, they could have purchased the account (though I thought all Citi accounts were going to a different party), could be more underhand tactics possibly. Also I would be tempted to ask Cabot on what basis are they charging interest, considering that you have not seen the document you signed when requested.

Citi are not playing ball with third parties, and haven't not supplied them with copies of the executed agreements to date (even if they have purchased accounts) -- just mailed them the T&C with your details inserted. You should have received a "Notice Of Assignment" to legally complete any transfer/sale of an account. A meer letter outlining the transfer does not suffice. Likelihood is that your executed agreement with Citi is either not enforeceable, they have an incomplete original, or have destroyed the executed agreement. As with all these things the decision is yours, however if they were to proceed with legal action (which is doubtful) you could CPR31.16 request to view the original executed agreement -- as the new account owner would be seeking an enforecement order on the basis of it. You would not be seeking to avoid any such alleged debt that they believe is due, but establish that the documentation is legally compliant and properly executed -- if obviously it is not there is room for negotiation in reaching a resolution outside of a courtroom.

Citi aren't supplying agreements to third parties, even DCAs representing them. In accordance with the test case clarification T&C fulfill the requirement for s78(1) CCA. That said it's obviously not your executed agreement signed by yourself, and you cannot ascertain whether it is legally compliant without viewing that. Obviously the decision is yours, but I doubt legal action would result from this because you could request to view the original or an exact copy of the original agreement under CPR -- which would have to be fully legally compliant for them to gain an enforcement order. My guess is that Citi could have been destroying original agreements upto 2006, and not retain copies of the reverse. And it's very difficult to demonstrate that a back belongs to a reverse without a shadow of a doubt, i.e. they'd likely have to produce an original application form.

Citi have a lot of problems with their agreements, especially Peoples Bank Connecticut ones. Mine came through Trading Standards after a lot of wrangling, and surprise, surprise unenforceable because of missing prescribed terms. Even had a letter from their data controller, telling me that the Terms & Conditions were the executed agreement -- nice try, but you've got to be a thick head to fall for that one.

What they've given you is the original T&C, essentially typed out with the words "credit agreement" attached. Though this was accepted in the Carey vs HSBC case, it is not obviously the document you signed. Whether you want to hold out is up to you, but the essentially question is why go to all the trouble of sending this, instead of a copy of the original executed agreement i.e. the document you signed? Dependent on how old your executed agreement is, it's likely they either don't have it, or it's faulty.

Would that be the Terms & Conditions, with the words "Credit Agreeement" inserted at the top?

Yep, keep us updated. Funny thing is that you learn a lot of these companies will outright lie, intimidate and harass an individual in the hope that they cough up. So don't worry that "may" likely means a "won't", and in the unlikely event of hell freezing over and their submitting a claim -- because the alleged debt is not admitted, they'd have to produce the original contract, something that Citi themselves have been unable or unwilling to do to date. In an unrelated matter I had an odious woman phone me up threatening to send someone round, charge me for it etc. Lots of contraventions of the "OFT Debt Collection Guide - guidelines on unfair practices" which will form a complaint. Have looked at their credit licence, and they don't have the right to canvass off premises -- which means they can't legally visit peoples homes..... so there you go, never trust a DCA.

I don't think you have any cause to worry, after all they are offering you a 25% discount which is telling in itself. And I think the thing to emphasise is the word "may" in the later paragraph -- pretty much certain it's another threat-o-gram.

Definitely.

Beggers belief that a DCA would contact your neighbours, certainly would be interesting to know what they discussed. Certainly if it was anything personal to you or your situation it would merit a complaint to the OFT and Information Commissioners Office. And yes, Wescot are a dosey bunch of shisters.