Cabots (again!!)

[Wbear]

Hi all

Can I ask for some help with Cabots and a default notice?

Had a credit card from Goldfish back in 2005. Got into problems with payments in 2006 when it all fell behind.

After some hunting around on the internet I know that at that time Morgan Stanley had bought Goldfish and that in 2007/8 they subsequently sold Goldfish on to Barclays.

In September of 2008 letters start appearing from Cabot stating that the account is in arrears and that if no action is taken a DN will be sent. There were subsequent phone calls from them to my home number.
Sent a letter to them at the end of December 2008 querying who they were and quoting breach of data protection for using my home phone number. Also stated that a DMP had been set up directly with Morgan Stanley.

January 2nd 2009 a DN arrives followed by a "Welcome to Cabots" letter 5 days later! On January 21 then get a letter saying the "agreement is terminated" letter.

Have sent a letter with the £1 postal order asking for the original agreement and all they did was send back the postal order and blame Barclays (who now own the account) for not sending them the paperwork. They've done this at least 3 times now.

Having had a read around am I right in thinking that the DN should have been served no longer than 6 months after the account initially fell into arrears, and also by the original creditor (which would have been Goldfish/Morgan Stanley) and not Cabot as they are a DCA?

Any help would be appreciated

[Angry Cat]

Re: Cabots (again!!)

Morgan Stanley - Press Release

[Angry Cat]

Re: Cabots (again!!)

One presumes that you had the Goldfish Card at the time that Goldfish was owned by Lloyds TSB?
If, it was in 2005 that presumption must be correct.

I suggest that you obtain copies of your credit file(s) in order to ascertain exactly when a Default marker was registered with the CRA's.
Or, perhaps you know?

[Angry Cat]

Re: Cabots (again!!)

Cabot likes to play games of cat and mouse/smoke and mirrors.
Also, their reputation goes ahead of them...

[labman]

Re: Cabots (again!!)

The DN should have been issued by the OC or the owner. If the debt has been assigned in absolute then Cabot are entitled to register the default. If it is an equitable assignment, they should not have recorded the default.

It is good practice to record the default within 6 months. Whether it is law I am unsure.

[Wbear]

Re: Cabots (again!!)

Labman

I'm not entirely sure what you mean in your post

"If the debt has been assigned in absolute then Cabot are entitled to register the default. If it is an equitable assignment, they should not have recorded the default."

Could you explain?

Read more at: Cabots (again!!) - Legal Beagles Consumer Forum

[Wbear]

Re: Cabots (again!!)

Also how do I find out which they have?

[labman]

Re: Cabots (again!!)

An absolute assignment means they actually own the debt outright and so have all the powers of the original creditor. An equitable assignment basically only gives them the right to try to get the money off you, but they cannot take leagal action against you unless they do so with the original creditor as the OC still owns the debt. 95% or more of assignments are equitable ones.

Usually you can spot them from the wording in their letters. If they ever talk about acting on behalf of their client or something along those lines, it will be an equitable assignment. If this is the case, they should not be placing defaults.

[Wbear]

Re: Cabots (again!!)

After much going through paperwork have found the "welcome" letter from Cabots, (which arrived a week after the DN). Tucked away on the back is says "It acts as notice of assignment of your account to Cabot Financial (UK) Limited"

This really doesn't seem to tell me anything though. Is this equitable or absolute? Do I send another SAR letter asking for any other letters of assignment or would I just be wasting my time?

Thanks for everyone's help

[Angry Cat]

Re: Cabots (again!!)

Also how do I find out which they have?

The $64,000 dollar question.

However, in the time frame 2008, there would have been a 'put back clause' within the equitable assignment.

Sounds like Cabot may have been left with many MS unwanted 'Lemons'...

Poor old Cabot may even end up as being akin to the: oozlem bird

The 'Cabot Fan Club' no doubt will snigger.

[labman]

Re: Cabots (again!!)

I suspect it is equitable - it would be more obvious if absolute. I imagine other letters will refer to 'our client' or similar.

Personally I'd report them to the Information Commissioner's Office for registering an unlawful default. Let them do the spade work for you.

[Wbear]

Re: Cabots (again!!)

Thanks Labman, that sounds promising.

They refer to "original lender" alot. When we sent a SAR letter last year they sent back the postal order and said that they did not have the information requested and so had in turn requested it from the "original lender". There have been 3 subsequent letters stating that they are still waiting for the "original lender" to provide the information. They have never provided a copy of the original agreement.

Think I will be off to find an address for the Information Commissioner's Office.

[labman]

Re: Cabots (again!!)

Have that bit on me:

Complaints - data protection and freedom of information - ICO


:beagle::beagle:

[Wbear]

Re: Cabots (again!!)

Thanks Labman

Will follow the link and then start letter writing.

If I get stuck can I come back to you?

[labman]

Re: Cabots (again!!)

I think you can do it on line. See how they respond - their responses vary. Defaults are notoriously tricky to get removed, but battling is half the satisfaction of the end win.