• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Gemini v Cabot(2)

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Gemini v Cabot(2)

    Hello :sick:,
    Sorry, not having a very good day, pain is bad.

    My second debt with Cabot is an alleged debt of some 3,000+GBP.

    I had a credit card from Monument in, I think 2005, with a 2,000GBP limit. My first piece of written evidence relating to this debt comes from Cabot and is dated 1/11/2006 in which they confirm an agreement I made to repay the outstanding debt of 2,734.82GBP at 5GBP/month. Obviously, this was one of the 5-6 I had arranged to repay through Regency Finance. Silly, I know, because they took a commission and I now know there are any number of ways it can be done without having to pay a fee. I have several reminders that I had not been making repayments as agreed from May 2007 onward until a letter came on 29th April 2008 to inform me that Cabot had bought the a/c from Monument and that the debt was now 3110.26GBP. On the reverse of the letter are a couple of points I should read carefully, one of which purports that they are now the "legal owners" of the a/c.

    I had informed Cabot as early as February 2007 that as a result of the damage done to my left wrist in an accident in Dec 2005, I had found it impossible to continue working and that I was now therefore in receipt of Incapacity Benefit, and out of work. I added that all indications were that I would never be able to do manual work again and that I would no longer be earning the amounts of money that made having credit cards possible. I had also respectfull requested that they squash the debt as there was no way I would be able to repay it.

    I had been tempted to write and congratulate them on their 'purchase' but chose instead to just ignore them. All telephone calls were just disconnected as soon as the caller was identified. All letters were returned unopened. Everything went quite until 8th September last year when I received a letter threatening me with one of the following :-
    1) a Warrant of Execution
    2) a Charging Order
    3) an Attatchment of Earnings ?! (Do they READ the mail?)
    4) an Order to Obtain Information, and
    5) an External Debt Collection Agency or Legal Agency calling on me.

    I was outraged and did in fact reply, pointing out that
    { 1)} was pointless [ see { 4)} below]
    as was {2)} since I have no property,
    { 3)} was just plain stupidity,
    { 4)} needed to be served as far as I know and I NEVER answer my door to anyone who does not have an appointment and finally,
    { 5)}..see { 1)} above.

    I have only had telephone calls relating to this matter since then.

    I now need to rest for some time before posting the H.F.C. and Welcome Finance problems in new threads.

    I trust that those of you following my posts will please forgive me my apparent weakness, but I seriously do hurt. Thank you.
    Two are always better than one,
    but not as complicated as three can be.

  • #2
    Re: Gemini v Cabot(2)

    Have they actually got a CCJ?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Gemini v Cabot(2)

      Sounds like a normal DCA letter to me

      Well the same rules about calls apply as I mention earlier.

      You really should have a read of this thread: Consumer Credit Agreements - A Guide - Legal Beagles

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Gemini v Cabot(2)

        Standard Cabot Threat-O-Gram. Don't take it personally. Difficult, I know. But they really are standard templates that everybody gets.

        CB is the guy who will guide you through it all. I'm off back to sea on Monday. I'll catch up when I get home in a month.
        My Blog
        http://cabotfanclub.wordpress.com

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Gemini v Cabot(2)

          Originally posted by tomterm8 View Post
          Have they actually got a CCJ?
          I have no clear idea about this, nor indeed, how it would affect/effect me.
          How do I ascertain as to whether or not a CCJ has been granted on this?
          Thank you
          Two are always better than one,
          but not as complicated as three can be.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Gemini v Cabot(2)

            Good morning. :tinysmile_twink_t2:

            The postman has delivered a letter, headed : " External Agency Recovery Notification". The usual call us immediately or Doorstep Agents will call and also that I must now contact a Recoveries Department Agent (posh name for a parasite's parasite), followed by the telephone number, which, needless to say I will not call. This letter is from F.I.R.E.

            The outstanding sum is now a massive 3,335.25GBP !!

            I remember actually writing a letter regarding this particular credit card debt some years ago in which I denied having used it for more then 2 or 3 hundred, certainly not the full 2,000, though to whom I addressed it I have no clear recollection. In any event, I deny liability. Having read a bit more around the site this morning, I am now also concerned that there may have been PPI included without my knowledge.

            {I only discovered that Llloyds, my own bank, had added PPI to a personal loan of 2,000GBP by accident. However following the usual carry-on with the Insurers, I recently received the 2,000 back into my a/c and all I ended up having to pay was the interest. I have to stress though, that I never missed a monthly payment on that loan}

            So, which letter do I fire (pun intended), off to them now? As I understand the preferred proceedure is to get the matter back into the hands of the actual issuer of the card, and deal with them? (The people I am supposed to have signed papers with?) Do I do the same thing with the other three debts?


            It is a nice Spring morning, the sun is shining and my general mood and demeanour match. I see a new begining and though I know this is going to take an awful long time, I am sure it will, in the end, be worth the effort. Also, let's face facts, I have very little else to do with my time!!
            Two are always better than one,
            but not as complicated as three can be.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Gemini v Cabot(2)

              ROFLMAO !!!!

              Complete and utter muppets !!

              Well first off throw a FULL CCA request at Cabot from my linked thread above.
              As for FIRE, this will bin them:

              Account In Dispute

              Dear Pondlife,


              Re. Account no. xx

              Thank you for your letter of xx/xx/xx advising me of a doorstep call. However, I write to advise you that under OFT rules, you can only visit me if you make an appointment and it is not my wish to make an appointment with you, or any of your representatives.

              There is only an implied license under English Common Law for certain people to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.). Therefore, please take note that I revoke license under Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and if you do, then you will be liable to damages for a tort of trespass. You would also be conspiring in a trespass if you sent someone to visit me nevertheless. Should it be necessary, I will obtain an injunction.

              Yours faithfully,
              Ps they wont be sending an agent, but hey ho slap 'em anyway

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Gemini v Cabot(2)

                Hey Ho is right!! I am sick laughing. It is now my intention to stock up with postage stamps as I see I may have a lot of letters to write, starting today.
                Thank you.
                Two are always better than one,
                but not as complicated as three can be.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Gemini v Cabot(2)

                  No worries, that's what I do, simply ensuring that the DCA act within statute law !!!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Gemini v Cabot(2)

                    Both letters written and posted. Postal Order sent . I now just wait for written response?

                    I am now going to open two new posts regarding Welcome Finance and HFC. See you over there, I trust.
                    Two are always better than one,
                    but not as complicated as three can be.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Gemini v Cabot(2)

                      Originally posted by Gemini566 View Post
                      I have no clear idea about this, nor indeed, how it would affect/effect me.
                      How do I ascertain as to whether or not a CCJ has been granted on this?
                      Thank you
                      If they haven't said you have a CCJ, then they certainly haven't got one.

                      In which case, all the threats in the letter are hot air. It is threat-o-gram #3. Next, they threaten you with bankruptcy "and you may lose your home". Except in your case, that threat is also hot air.

                      You should S.A.R. the original creditor ( maybe Lloyds? ) to find out what the actual final debt was, what charges can be reclaimed etc.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Gemini v Cabot(2)

                        Good morning CB,

                        I have had a reply from Cabot this morning...very quick I thought.

                        Basically they say that they "..acknowledge receipt of your request under sections 77 and/or 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

                        The Cabot Financial Group is not obliged to provide this information but we are pleased to help and have already requested the documentation for you from the original lender.

                        Cabot Financial does not accept the statuatory fee required under section 77 and/or 78 of the CCA 1974 and as a result Cabot has returned the fee for £1.00 that you have sent." They then go on about telephone calls and how I have said I am unhappy, but that because I was now co-operating they would stop. If I stop, they will start again. They finish by saying that they anticipate being able to supply the information within 12 days and that, in the unlikely event they are unable to do so, they will write again. In the meantime, if I have any queries or payment options I should contact them.

                        The debt has increased yet again to £3338.96.

                        Do I just wait now?

                        Two are always better than one,
                        but not as complicated as three can be.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Gemini v Cabot(2)

                          Yep keep that safe, but wait for their compliance and DON'T worry about the balance increasing.
                          Hey they could say you owe the National Debt of Guatamala, but without the paperwork they are royally STUFFED

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Gemini v Cabot(2)

                            Noted.

                            Now, what about the Capital One debts? I have two, by the look of it. One went to CapQuest and the latest correspondence on that is a Doorstep from ScotCall - again - date Feb 2008.

                            The other went to Lowell and the latest on it is from RED and is dated Oct 2008. They say they are going to advice their client (Capital One, according to the information below the salutation), to wait until the debt reaches the £750.00 insolvency threshold, at which point a petition will be filed for bankruptcy.

                            As with all my other debts, I do nort deny owing the money, I just question the amounts and I am also concerned that PPI's may have been added without my knowledge or consent and as I was not told, I could not claim when had my accident.

                            I THINK RED tried to call last week, proir to your advise to me regarding "everything now in writing"
                            Two are always better than one,
                            but not as complicated as three can be.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Gemini v Cabot(2)

                              No worries.
                              So Snotcall we have dealt with as for CQ, as and when they resurface CCA them.

                              Lowells and RED well they are urinating into some inclement weather, when the debt reaches £750 indeed and how is that going to happen ?!?!

                              Well again when they resurface, CCA them.

                              Have you any idea on the value of charges/PPI to outstanding debt ?
                              Did you ever make a start on reclaiming ?

                              Comment

                              View our Terms and Conditions

                              LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

                              If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


                              If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.

                              Announcement

                              Collapse

                              Support LegalBeagles


                              Donate with PayPal button

                              LegalBeagles is a free forum, founded in May 2007, providing legal guidance and support to consumers and SME's across a range of legal areas.

                              See more
                              See less

                              Court Claim ?

                              Guides and Letters
                              Loading...



                              Search and Compare fixed fee legal services and find a solicitor near you.

                              Find a Law Firm


                              Working...
                              X