Cabot Subject Access Request (SAR)

[gprit]

morning - page 3 is as received from Cabot.....are the missing numbers important enough to request them to resend?? (suspect they will only have the same version)

[AndyOrch]

Well its difficult to read the T&Cs

[gprit]

Appreciate the difficulty......can you manage or do I ask for a non-truncated copy, if they have one.

What happens if they don't? Is it critical?

[AndyOrch]

If we cant read it a Judge cant read it...so it falls into the area of illegible.?

[gprit]

ok..I will contact Cabot and see what they say....

[gprit]

ok.....Cabot sent T&C again,

BUT, although my printed name and address was at the top, it was NOT the signed agreement/document they previously sent and which I previously uploaded.

 

I called them....they confirmed that they ONLY had the original version (ie with the LH side of p3 mssing) (also not signed by Halifax) of the CC agreement.

 

They claim the one they sent me meets CCA requirements.

 

This is attached - my signature is not on this.

 

I confirmed that our conversation had been recorded.

Cabot_IF.Terms_redacted.pdf

[dx100uk]

Irrelevant as it doesn't have your name anywhere

Just came out of their filing cabinet

Or more probably from here somewhere...

[AndyOrch]

It was really page 3 of your initial upload that you required...not the above.

[gprit]

As I said...Cabot confirmed that the original p3 uploaded was the ONLY one they had with my signature on it.

[AndyOrch]

As I said...Cabot confirmed that the original p3 uploaded was the ONLY one they had with my signature on it.

 

Well its questionable...and not very authentic should they ever decide to litigate with it.

[gprit]

So...do you think it would be in order to stop the agreed nominal payment each month and see what tey say/do?

[AndyOrch]

I wouldn't be paying them anything in the first place....paperwork or no paperwork to be honest.

[gprit]

That's all well to say but paying £1/month nominal payment I don't want to provoke legal action which might result inn favour of Cabot.

[AndyOrch]

What makes you think paying them £1 pm wont stop them litigating ? It could have been statute barred by now then they couldn't.

[Guest]

That's all well to say but paying £1/month nominal payment I don't want to provoke legal action which might result inn favour of Cabot.

why ask then

if, as you say, you will have no assets on death, why not let it die with you then. as you said?

hopefully they won't pursue (eg charging order) before you sell yr house.

[gprit]

1) They haven't done so over the past 4/5 years paying £1/month

2) I may well continue with payments and let it 'die with me' but I would rather know the legal position and stop payments.

3) The house I am selling is not in my name and does not have equity - it is an executor sale on my late wife's estate.

[Deb T]

firstly

its a Subject Access Request..dunno where Search came from?

 

 

2. under an sar, which to a dca is pretty much pointless, they are not obliged to send any of your agreements or whatever you asked for like the novation or the deeds.

 

.

 

 

Notwithstanding Dx100uk's vastly superior knowledge and expertise I don't altogether think sending a SAR to DCA is such a bad thing and in Cabot's case a SAR sent to them (to which they responded with one) proved to be pretty effective in dealing with them from that point onwards.

 

I'm not sure if things have changed in the last few years on what a DCA has to send in a requested SAR but on the one Cabot supplied to the alleged debtor in my case proved more than useful.

 

Cabot didn't include any agreements or valid assignments (one could be forgiving into thinking by their absence they didn't have them but hey.....) but what they did send was a plethora of copies of letters they'd sent to the alleged debtor with times/dates/amounts on

 

but where the alleged debtor in many of the instances had actual hard copies still to hand and where Cabot mutterings were inconsistent with what the alleged debtor had on file and

 

although some of the data supplied in those letters were redacted or computer code it was clear (in my opinion) that in some instances Cabot had looked at the time inventory on their computer of correspondence sent and where the specific details were not available

 

so instead they appeared to rely on std template letters and then modified them slight to suit, just a shame in some instances what they say they sent to what was actually sent was altogether different and inaccurate (putting it mildly)

 

Cabot also provided a complete statement (computer generated one) which showed the dates of the nominal payments payments made to them and their own entries for interest added (although no agreement anywhere both with the OC or Cabot existed where interest could be applied)

 

but on the letters they churned out along with some annual statements no such interest/total was shown and they were still reporting the debt to the alleged debtor at the reduced/original amount less the nominal payments.

 

..Cabot also applied the amount they had added on along with the original debt and added that to the alleged debtors credit file, nice that.

There were plenty of other anomalies in the SAR,

 

Cabot by sending it shot themselves in the foot and when they came to the point of litigation and with help from that ever wonderful and particularly astute Andyorch a counter defence was offered, submitted and then silence from Cabot,

 

the alleged debt is now statute barred but had Cabot decided to proceed they would have partially been beaten by their own design.

(There is much more but this isn't the post to place it)

 

I would take on board the advice offered by Dx100uk and AndyOrch as in my opinion they have been instrumental in keeping the likes of Cabot and their frankly disgusting tactics when attempted to collect debt, at bay.

 

...Cabot are unworthy of anything other than the contents off the bottom of someones shoe after they're run through a field of doggdoo for an hour.

 

Deb

[dx100uk]

:yo:

[Deb T]

You could always take out an educated guess at your life expectancy?

When your house sale goes through stick in say 30 years worth (think positive) (total £1800) into an account that adds interest, make the payments standing order and sail into France cosy in the knowledge that you've got it covered..

 

 

.and at the end of the 30 years just sit back,

enjoy your letter from the King for your 100th and bask in the interest you've made,

 

 

I don't think it will quite extend to a bottle of Screaming Eagle Cabernet Sauvignon 1992 but you might just about be able to grab a Chateau Neuf Du Pape?

 

Enjoy!

[AndyOrch]

Never acknowledge a DCA...it only encourages them to harass others

[Deb T]

On a serious note, A cabot alleged debt and where a nominal amount paid each month such as what the gprit describes is pretty much the same situation .

 

If it helps, the alleged cabot debt was being paid each and every month, why bother to rock the boat? I mean, it's a negligible amount each month, they don't seem to want to pursue it and the allged debtor had sort of built back up their credit file?

 

However, with the help given here and from reading the many thousands of posts where Cabot are concerned it became clear that maybe, just maybe Cabot didn't have a leg to stand on, but moving from not wanting to rock the boat to prodding the vipers nest, well it was a big step and I can understand why anyone would feel apprehensive in doing so and I suspect this is where the Op is/was at?

 

I can say that removing ones head from the dirt and actually confronting those filthy miscreants known as Cabot was probably one of the smartest moves the alleged debtor made, Cabot had pretty much nothing to go on and what they did have they 'apperared to have fabricated' to justify their own means. In a CCA request they provided an incorrect agreement, where it mentioned a cca act but was the wrong one, where the interest terms were different and right at the death and when they finally provided what they thought was their trump card a 'signed credit agreement' it was for the wrong card (mastercard as opposed to visa) how did they do that you might ask? the other card had long since been paid and was nothing to do with any alleged debt.

 

In the agreement where the 'ticks' were, one box was ticked, the other was not, in the original held by the alleged debtor the one box was ticked and a date stamp added, in the one Cabot supplied the tick was strangely enough in the other box for the other type of card the OC offered (you ticked the one you wanted ) where the original tick once was there was now a 'smudge mark with parts of the small box around the tick erased...must have been the printer? Yeah right.

 

In my opinion if Cabot thought they had the upper hand they would almost certainly progress it, if they thought they'd get away with a 'default judgement' they'd probably file (they did in this instance) but if you defend the court action using the relevant template from here,where there is no admission of debt at any point...well then Cabot have a simple choice to make once your file? Put their money where their legal mouth is, if you hear nothing and continue to hear nothing, assume after an amount of time that Cabot never had a case in the first place, they were just being speculative.

 

Sometimes you just have to put your faith in the knowledge of others and forge ahead, it may not always work, there are no hard/fast rules but what there most certainly is is a shed load of others on this site that have been exactly where the OP currently is and have come out the other side with an immense amount of relief and where Cabot have been left with precisely nothing (and rightly so in my opinion)

 

Bottom feeders have their place, Cabot have no place

[gprit]

Thank you for that DebT.

 

I will await and see what other agreements they are able to produce before I decide which way to go..

..as you say, sometimes don't rock the boat.

 

There have been opinions on whether the CC agreement is valid with the left hand side of p3 missing, and signed by me but not signed (or stamped) by Halifax.

 

You will all appreciate that opinions are just that (and I do thank you for these),

 

but somewhere along the line I would need to get a formal legal viewpoint on that document before I decided which way to go.

[AndyOrch]

The following thread may be of interest to you.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?474621-Court-action-on-up-to-date-payment-plan

 

[theoldrouge]

1)

2) I may well continue with payments and let it 'die with me' but I would rather know the legal position and stop payments.

 

The legal position as regards s78 (cca requests)

is

 

 

https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/CONC/13.pdf

[gprit]

Thank you for that.

 

 

It seems to me that under s 13.1.4 they can send me practically any old agreement template.....signed or not....

 

"1) The copy of the executed agreement should be a 'true copy' of the original. However, as confirmed in the case of Carey v HSBC Bank plc[2009] EWHC 3417 (QB), in this context the term 'true copy' does not necessarily mean a carbon, photocopy, microfiche copy or other exact copy of the signed agreement. There is no obligation to provide a copy which includes a copy of the signature.

 

2) The firm can reconstitute a copy. It can do this by re-populating a template of the relevant agreement form with the details of the specific agreement taken from its records. If the firm does provide a reconstituted copy, it should explain that that is what it has done, to avoid misleading the customer that this is a contemporaneous copy. "