Capquest tradimg license lapsed??

[ecalid]

Hi guys.

So it appears their trading license has lapsed, I have an outsta ding claim with these pirates and would like to know where i stand with this.

I am led to believe that by virtue of section 39 & 40 that any agreements they provide are unenforcable??

Any input would be great.

Thanks in advance.

https://register.fca.org.uk/shpo_sea...=3wq1nht7eg7tr

[Amethyst]

Try this one - https://register.fca.org.uk/ShPo_Fir...000001m0PKcAAM

[ecalid]

Would the fact that the claim that has been issued to myself is under their Capquest Investments Limited name and not Capquest Debt Recovery, have any bearing on the enforcement of the debt??

I'm slightly confused.

[Amethyst]

Oh, so it actually is Capquest Investments. Yes seems they are unauthorised then, much in the same way Cabot Financial (UK) are unauthorised but Cabot Financial ( Europe) are. So it's not actually clear and the FCA are no good at clarifying matters, and as far as I am aware there hasn't been any judgment made on the authorisation basis.

It wouldn't make the original agreement unenforceable, just that Capquest Investments don't have the necessary permissions to enforce it. I'll get the bits, I think Paul posted them recently.... 39 & 40 of the CCA are no more though... it's FSMA and CONC now ( FCA handbook and Financial Services & Markets Act )

actually Diana M and pt2537

are better placed to answer this, so just tagging them in ...

[Amethyst]

Just confirming Capquest investments isn't on the licence for Capquest Debt Recovery

Registered	Capquest Debt Recovery Limited	19/10/2015
Trading	Capquest	07/02/2017
Trading	Capquest Secure	07/02/2017
Trading	CDR	07/02/2017[

This is pt2537 's explanation ( in relation to another company without authorisation) you probably want to check all the relevant parts of the FSMA & RAO ( Regulated activities order) but should give you a decent starting point to look into things. It's incredibly complex and as yet, no definitive answer ( unless PT or Di know any different ) ( Di might have a different way of arguing the point too )

The Company appears on the register, however the company’s permissions to carry out regulated activities has lapsed and is no longer effective. The Claimant is therefore not authorised by the FCA for regulated activities. .

An activity is a regulated activity under the Financial Services & Markets Act 2000 (‘FSMA’) if it is an activity of a specified kind which is carried on by way of business and “it relates to an investment of a specified kind” (see section 22(1) FSMA).

Specified” means specified by an order made by the Treasury (see section 22(5)). Activities and investments are specified for the purposes of FSMA by the Financial Services & Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001 (‘RAO’) (see article 4(1)).

Rights under a credit agreement are an investment of a specified kind for the purposes of section 22 of FSMA (see articles 73 and 88D of the RAO).
Article 60B(3) of the RAO defines credit agreement and regulated credit agreement:
‘credit agreement’ means an agreement between an individual or relevant recipient of credit (‘A’) and any other person (‘B’) under which B provides A with credit of any amount;

‘exempt agreement’ means a credit agreement which is an exempt agreement under articles 60C and 60H;

‘regulated credit agreement’ means any credit agreement which is not an exempt agreement.

Section 19 of FSMA prohibits a person from carrying on a regulated activity in the United Kingdom unless he is an authorised person or an exempt person (‘the general prohibition’). Carrying on a regulated activity without authorisation or exemption under FSMA is an offence (see sections 19 and 23 of FSMA).

Section 19 FSMA states: -
“19 The general prohibition

(1) No person may carry on a regulated activity in the United Kingdom, or purport to do so, unless he is –
(a) an authorised person; or
(b) an exempt person.

(2) The prohibition is referred to in this Act as the general prohibition.”

Section 23 FSMA states: -
“23 Contravention of the general prohibition

(1) A person who contravenes the general prohibition is guilty of an offence and liable –
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or both;
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or a fine, or both.”

The regulated activity of debt collecting is specified by article 39F of the RAO which provides in relation to debts under credit agreements: -
“Debt collecting

39F. (1) Taking steps to procure the payment of a debt due under a credit
agreement or a relevant article 36H agreement is a specified kind of activity.
(2) Taking steps to procure the payment of a debt due under a consumer hire agreement is a specified kind of activity.
(3) Paragraph 1 does not apply insofar as the activity is an activity of the kind specified by article 36H (operating an electronic system in relation to lending).
(4) In this article, “relevant article 36H agreement” means an article 36H agreement (within the meaning of article 36H) which has been entered into with the facilitation of an authorised person with permission to carry on a regulated activity of the kind specified by that article.”
{Emphasis added}

It is clear that the Claimant has been and is continuing to seek to procure payment from the Defendant under a regulated consumer credit agreement contrary to the prohibition as set out in the FSMA 2000.

The Claimant cannot rely on an appointed representative to carry out regulated work which requires authorisation under the FSMA as the Claimant as principal must be authorised. The Claimant clearly is not authorised under the FSMA and therefore cannot undertake regulated activities in its own name. Even if the Claimant were to rely on a third party, to undertake debt collection activities, the Claimant must be authorised as a principal.

[ecalid]

My apologies, I should have been more clear from the start.

Where can I find more information on FMSA and CONC?

Thanks again.

[Amethyst]

FSMA - https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/8/contents
CONC - https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/hand.../?view=chapter ( R is RULE - G is Guidance )

Overview https://www.fca.org.uk/firms/authori...ebt-collectors

[Diana M]

Just confirming Capquest investments isn't on the licence for Capquest Debt Recovery

Di might have a different way of arguing the point too

Yes we do.

Di

[ecalid]

This may explain why in their screen dump from the original creditor containing the account particulars, capquest/restons appear to have been sent the relevant CCA but have not tried to enforce it? As technically they could be opening themselves up to prosecution?.

[ecalid]

it would be very interesting to see your input on this Di.

Diana M