Cabot Financial UK Ltd

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

So, lets assume you go to court and argue the incorrect entry, the main point of your argument being ... due to the incorrect entry the agreement should not be enforced against the debtor due to a misreprentation, making the agreement voidable at the discretion of the debtor? Debtor wishes the agreement to be unenforceable and void.

Cabot's defence being ... Mr judge, CF Marlin has had a change of name reflected in CH and it is incorrect insofar as the entry on the credit report hasn't been updated to reflect the new name change. We are exempt to have a licence (under debate) as we instruct an authorised firm to exercise our rights of recovering the debt. The debtor still owes the money to the creditor and there would be no difference in the debtors position if the entry of the company name was changed or not. Yes there has technically been a breach of DPA under principle 4 but this is a minor breach to which the ICO has the power correct the matter or in extreme cases fine company if it so wishes. But Mr judge should not make a ruling that agreement is unenforceable. This would be unjust.

Judge orders:

1. entry to be corrected in credit report.
2. Agreement still enforceable
3. nominal damages (maybe if your lucky)

that's how I'd see it panning out but of course judges are wierd and wonderful and the outcome may be different on the day.

Thanks for playing devils advocate Rob I do really appreciate it.............I believe that the claim could also be brought under section 140 of the CCA to "open the door" to also bring in the Misrepresentation Act.
In this case who is the creditor when the debt was assigned by the original creditor? Marlin Financial Services LIMITED are claiming to be the creditor.
The ICO has no power to correct data supplied to CRA's it can recommend/advise it to be corrected.
Sparkie

[R0b]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

The ICO has no power to correct data supplied to CRA's it can recommend/advise it to be corrected.

Debatable, they do have powers by way of enforcement notices failure to comply with that can result in a fine.

@Sparkie1723 I haven't forgotten about this but will take some time to digest. In the meantime I'm not sure if you have come across the Supreme Court case of Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance Ltd - guidance on unfair relationship (s.140) and the lords stated that the very minimum creditors should be doing to ensure a fair relationship is comply with the Consumer Credit Sourcebook (CONC).

I referenced somewhere a couple of paragraphs in the CONC relating to providing evidence if dispute and notification of assignment in a prompt manner. Under s.140 the court likes at the whole range of issues and isn't restricted when it comes to finding whether a relationship was unfair, unlike the UTCCR.

[asifsh]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

I've been to my hearing very recently as a defendant and Cabot Financial UK Ltd as the Claimant for about £7500 claim.

I rose the point that Cabot Financial UK Ltd's license had lapsed before making this claim and under the CCA s40 an agreement can not be enforced by an unlicensed entity. The judge asked the Claimant's representative for explanation. He said that he has been informed that Cabot Financial UK Ltd as being part of the Cabot/Marlin are allowed to use license of their sister/parent company. I told the judge there is a judgement which prevents them from doing so. I had read about Hicks v Walker and Reynolds in this thread.

The judge said to Claimant's representative that this is possibly a fundamental error in the claim.

A 2nd hearing will be held in 3-4 weeks. I been asked to submit the judgment (Hicks v Walker and Reynolds) and the the Claimant has been asked to provide evidence to prove their compliance with the license using a proxy.

Can some one guide how I can obtain a copy of Hicks v Walker and Reynolds and/or any similar case.

[Nibbler]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

This? http://legalbeagles.info/hicks-v-wal...1999-gccr-721/

- - - Updated - - -
[MENTION=551]pt2537[/MENTION]

[R0b]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Interesting, was their representative legally qualified? obviously CB UK cannot "use" their licence per se but as our discussions on this thread have encountered it may be possible to be exempt provided by using an authorised third party to exercise their rights.

Even if CB UK lose this case in question, I think it would be naive of them not to appeal it and get an authoritative ruling on whether they can or cannot be exempt under the FSMA.

Do you have any counter argument to this argument asifh?

Also, just read the case of Hicks v Walker & Reynolds. I suppose this could be distinguished to an extent given that it related to credit-brokerage rather than simple exercising one's rights as a creditor.

[pt2537]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Quick message for Nem,

Not gone quiet on this at all, there is an appeal before a High Court judge which will deal with these issues, until the matter is resolved the rest is speculation.

Sadly i am more limited than ever due to recent news in my private life which has had to come first for a change.

So there we go

- - - Updated - - -

Interesting, was their representative legally qualified? obviously CB UK cannot "use" their licence per se but as our discussions on this thread have encountered it may be possible to be exempt provided by using an authorised third party to exercise their rights.

Even if CB UK lose this case in question, I think it would be naive of them not to appeal it and get an authoritative ruling on whether they can or cannot be exempt under the FSMA.

Do you have any counter argument to this argument asifh?

Also, just read the case of Hicks v Walker & Reynolds. I suppose this could be distinguished to an extent given that it related to credit-brokerage rather than simple exercising one's rights as a creditor.

One can always distinguish a case if you look hard enough. The commentary in Goodes law report though makes it clear that the scheme being used in Walker & Reynolds was merely designed to avoid the licensing regime within the CCA and therefore should not be allowed. In my view this is right, the purpose of the regime was to ensure consumers were protected from unlicensed traders.

I cannot see that Cabot can be allowed to avoid being authorised in the way being suggested, this doesnt seem to accord with the advice from counsel who advised the FCA themselves on their licensing structure, but as i say there will be a judicial decision on this soon enough.

[R0b]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Of course I agree with you, there can always be two sides to an argument and I agree with you on Cabot's position, whilst the specific exemption under the Act may have been intended for a specific use, it does not specifically state that the exemption applies only for specific purposes i.e. article 55 provides exemptions strictly for special purpose vehicles, which I believe was the FCA's intentions. Theoretically, Cabot would be appear to be acting in accordance with article 55 and as you say, it would be up to the court to decide whether or not they are trying to circumvent FCA authorisation.

Also bearing in mind that case was made under the CCA however since the FCA has different rules and regulations and repealed the majority of the CCA in relation to conducting such activities, the outcome may be different.

At what point are we to expect a decision on this high court appeal?

Might it be wise for asifh to point this out to the court and adjourn proceedings until such decision has been made?

[asifsh]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

At what point are we to expect a decision on this high court appeal?

Might it be wise for asifh to point this out to the court and adjourn proceedings until such decision has been made?

Any further details will be very helpful.

This is my first time in court and this site has been extremely helpful.

[R0b]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

if [MENTION=551]pt2537[/MENTION] is able to supply details, I would be inclined to point this out to the court and ask for a stay on proceedings until such case has been concluded.

You said a hearing in 3-4 weeks, have you received an order from the court yet?

[asifsh]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

if @pt2537 is able to supply details, I would be inclined to point this out to the court and ask for a stay on proceedings until such case has been concluded.

You said a hearing in 3-4 weeks, have you received an order from the court yet?

Not as of yet. The judge made a verbal order to submit witness statement with mention of judgement (Hicks v Walker and Reynolds) by 23rd Nov 2015. I am not sure about the next hearing date, but I expact it around 14 days from 23/11/15.

[asifsh]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

if @pt2537 is able to supply details, I would be inclined to point this out to the court and ask for a stay on proceedings until such case has been concluded.

You said a hearing in 3-4 weeks, have you received an order from the court yet?

Received a copy of 'notice of Discontinuance' from Claimant's solicitors today.

Thanks all.

[MIKE770]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

[QUOTE=asifsh;592244]Received a copy of 'notice of Discontinuance' from Claimant's solicitors today.

Thanks all.[/QUOTE

Well Done

[nemesis45]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Received a copy of 'notice of Discontinuance' from Claimant's solicitors today.

Thanks all.

That's good all over now!!

nem

[mystery1]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Received a copy of 'notice of Discontinuance' from Claimant's solicitors today.

Thanks all.

Didn't fancy a hearing on whether they were breaking the law or not then !

M1

[R0b]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Glad to hear