citifinancial issues

[harrassed senior]

Adding to the above good advice, make sure that the CCA request you send contains the following sentence:

 

If you intend to send a reconstituted copy of the CCA you must declare the reason why it has been reconstituted and if the original exists and in what form (microfiche) etc.

 

This is because as Spamheed said above whilst they are allowed to reconstruct to satisfy your CCA request, they need the original, signed document to make the alleged debt enforceable in Court.

 

Just consider the stupidity of their words!

[Angel104]

When I sent off the cca request it took them 2 years to reply and all they sent back were copy statments nothing with a dsignature on it and according to them that is they are legally required to send.

[the_shadow]

When I sent off the cca request it took them 2 years to reply and all they sent back were copy statments nothing with a dsignature on it and according to them that is they are legally required to send.

 

hmmm did they state that in writing or verbally.... at the end of the day they could claim the moon is made of cheese... doesnt make it right... does it?

 

S.

[Angel104]

I wrote to cabot and asked for a copy of the default notice and they have written back and said that as they did not issue it they cannot supply a copy. Is this right and what should I do?

[the_shadow]

I wrote to cabot and asked for a copy of the default notice and they have written back and said that as they did not issue it they cannot supply a copy. Is this right and what should I do?

 

Well they are correct that they didnt issue it... the creditor usually prints these off in large batches and doesnt normally save them so possibly wont have a copy either.

There is no need for them to actually show you a copy but they will need to convince a judge (IF it EVER gets that far) that you received one before being able to receive monies not due under the cca.

 

S.

[alfwithhair]

Cabot will tell you any old tosh.

 

They told me they have a legal right to add interest as set out in the agreement, which 4 months earlier they said they couldn't supply. So how do they know what it says in a non existant agreement

Absolute Nawkers

[Tingy]

Unless I've missed something, you don't state that you have sent a recent CCA request to them. It would be worth your while doing that for the sake of £1.00

[spamheed]

You need to get all of your ducks in a row so to speak, if they take you to court you need to demonstrate that not only have they "bought" a debt whilst it is under dispute but continue to attempt enforcement whilst they were fully aware of the dispute.

 

Send them the CCA request, repeat your request of DNand any other proof and as soon as (and if) Morgan get involved go straight for the throat with CPR14 and/or 18 to build a clear picture of their behaviours and breaches

[Angel104]

I did send them a cca request and all they have sent back are statements they have provided nothing with a signature on it. They said that they debt must be mine because

 

 

 

I did send them a cca reqest and all they sent back are statements there is nothing with a signature on it. They said that as they have my name and address then the debt must be mine. They have flatly refused to provide anything with a signature on it.

[spamheed]

They are talking rubbish, using the same logic, as I have the queens name and address I can assumer she owes me money?

 

They are obliged to furnish you with the agreement, or even a reproduction (or as they like to call them "representation") for the purposes of s77/78 but either way without any kind of agreement being provided in line with CCA then you have nothing to answer, you are not liable for anything until they prove this and should be telling them so (in writing) this would also be part of building a case, letters telling you lies are admisable as evidence and the whole "you owe us because we say so" claim is an outright lie.

[the_shadow]

I did send them a cca request and all they have sent back are statements they have provided nothing with a signature on it. They said that they debt must be mine because

 

 

 

I did send them a cca reqest and all they sent back are statements there is nothing with a signature on it. They said that as they have my name and address then the debt must be mine. They have flatly refused to provide anything with a signature on it.

 

standard spiel from them i'm afraid... fact is if they were to take you to court the outstanding s78 request would be a big difficulty for them to overcome

 

S.

[Duffers Mum]

They provided me with a completely useless reconstructed agreement, its so flawed its laughable..however they continue to add interest and the debt is getting bigger and bigger, they are a law unto themselves, i've not heard from them since they said they would go back to original company to get an actual copy of my CCA (which the other company couldn't provide in the first place, only ever received an application form) but as I said, the continue to pile on the interest

 

Good luck

[alfwithhair]

I am in more or less the same boat, over 4k in interest added, illegible application form.

No replies to any letters.

Didn't even bother to ask the OC for a copy of the agreement.

No annual statements

No sign of any court actions, just threat after threat that it will happen.

Getting nowwhere with the own letterheads so started to burn me with Fire.

That didn't work so got Clarity to do their dirty work now.

They are as you say ' a law unto themselves'

 

What they think inflating the debt is going to do if they take no legal action I don't know.

The more they increase it, the less chance there is of any one paying it on principle.

Maybe it makes there accounts look better.

 

They are just a total nightmare to get any sense out of. "we can do this because we said so" that all you get out of them.

[the_shadow]

They provided me with a completely useless reconstructed agreement, its so flawed its laughable..however they continue to add interest and the debt is getting bigger and bigger, they are a law unto themselves, i've not heard from them since they said they would go back to original company to get an actual copy of my CCA (which the other company couldn't provide in the first place, only ever received an application form) but as I said, the continue to pile on the interest

 

Good luck

 

If they have replied to your s78 request with a reconstructed agreement and it conforms to carey vs HSBC then they are not restricted from obtaining judgement if they take you to court... however they need to convince a judge of the agreement, only caveat to that is some judges dont take much convincing.

 

S.

[spamheed]

If they have replied to your s78 request with a reconstructed agreement and it conforms to carey vs HSBC then they are not restricted from obtaining judgement if they take you to court... however they need to convince a judge of the agreement, only caveat to that is some judges dont take much convincing.

 

S.

 

I would suggest everyone in this position reads Carey very carefully and understands that a reconstructed agreement can only be used to satisfy a s77/78 request and can not be used in court.

 

There are some DCAs who have presented reconstructions in court and even convinced the judge that it was acceptable even though it isn't and because the LIP hadn't read up on Carey they lost

[the_shadow]

I would suggest everyone in this position reads Carey very carefully and understands that a reconstructed agreement can only be used to satisfy a s77/78 request and can not be used in court.

 

There are some DCAs who have presented reconstructions in court and even convinced the judge that it was acceptable even though it isn't and because the LIP hadn't read up on Carey they lost

 

Even some who have read up on Carey have lost... if a judge decides day is night or night is day its appealable but at a cost.

 

S.

[spamheed]

Even some who have read up on Carey have lost... if a judge decides day is night or night is day its appealable but at a cost.

 

S.

 

This is unfortunately very true and falls into the realm of the judge lottery, however as my old dad used to say "forewarned is forearmed" as they say, and if you know what's coming your way, you have a much better chance of defending against it

[the_shadow]

This is unfortunately very true and falls into the realm of the judge lottery, however as my old dad used to say "forewarned is forearmed" as they say, and if you know what's coming your way, you have a much better chance of defending against it

 

Indeed SH, you had a very wise dad

 

S.

[spamheed]

Indeed SH, you had a very wise dad

 

S.

 

On occasion

[Duffers Mum]

If they have replied to your s78 request with a reconstructed agreement and it conforms to carey vs HSBC then they are not restricted from obtaining judgement if they take you to court... however they need to convince a judge of the agreement, only caveat to that is some judges dont take much convincing.

 

S.

 

Ah and there is the $20M question...if it conforms to Carey vs HSBC...I can't say too much because of our "guests" but I am pretty sure it would get laughed out of any court in the land...I haven't read the Carey ruling in full, and must admit what I have read, I don't really understand (being just a simple soul!) so guess I will just have to take my chances in court, if it gets that far....Alf, how long have Cabot held your account for them to have added that much?

[alfwithhair]

Ah and there is the $20M question...if it conforms to Carey vs HSBC...I can't say too much because of our "guests" but I am pretty sure it would get laughed out of any court in the land...I haven't read the Carey ruling in full, and must admit what I have read, I don't really understand (being just a simple soul!) so guess I will just have to take my chances in court, if it gets that far....Alf, how long have Cabot held your account for them to have added that much?

 

Was sold to Crapbot January 2009

[the_shadow]

Ah and there is the $20M question...if it conforms to Carey vs HSBC...I can't say too much because of our "guests" but I am pretty sure it would get laughed out of any court in the land...I haven't read the Carey ruling in full, and must admit what I have read, I don't really understand (being just a simple soul!) so guess I will just have to take my chances in court, if it gets that far....Alf, how long have Cabot held your account for them to have added that much?

 

Ok the basic test is that it must be honest and true... hard for a DCA to be both of these imho as a starting point anyway

 

So it needs to have all the proper prescribed terms and the name and address of the debtor AT the time of taking the agreement out. Also if the card terms have been varied then DJ Waksman stated they need to provide the original also.

 

S.

[alfwithhair]

My thoughts on Cabot's balance inflation on peoples accounts is this.

 

They buy a debt of 5K from the OC at 20p in the pound (£1000)

Then when you refuse to pay they cock about sending threats for about 2 years adding interest till the balance is about double (10K)

Then they sell it on to some other DCA down the chain for 10p in the pound (£1000)

SO they have lost nothing, if they can get 15p, then they have made a profit without the debtor paying a penny.

 

It would be interesting to know if Cabot add interest to ALL their purchases or is it just the ones they cannot get a payment arragement in place.

 

Who would pay them £10 a month if they are going to put £100 interest on it. Nobody I would expect.

 

Thats my take on it anyway

[the_shadow]

Not a bad theory Alf....

 

Also never underestimate the psychological effect of seeing your credit file or even just a piece of paper showing the balance going up and up and up.....

 

S.

[Duffers Mum]

Shadow - ah thank you for that...

 

Alf - that's a heck of a lot of interest for 2 years!