Cabot Financial UK Ltd

[mystery1]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Forgive me if I am being a bit ignorant here but…..Would this would be the same FCA that apparently turned a blind eye to the fact that Banks had outstanding CCJs against them when they renewed their credit licences? Oh aye, we can sit back and leave everything in their capable hands.

But we aren't though. Each defendant has statute on their side. CCA s39 and s40.

M1

[meellis]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

One thing that should be considered is how pressure could be applied so they can't renew their licence.

[PAWS]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Forgive me if I am being a bit ignorant here but…..Would this would be the same FCA that apparently turned a blind eye to the fact that Banks had outstanding CCJs against them when they renewed their credit licences? Oh aye, we can sit back and leave everything in their capable hands.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Well with the financial industry that means a fine that goes into coffers that never helps the victims, nobody held to account and then forgotten about ready for the next in a long line of scandals. Joe average abides by rules, regulations and laws in the belief they will get hung drawn and quartered but the finance industry will continue to take the p**s because they know the authorities are ineffective and they can run rings around laws due to finances so that just leaves them paying fines that go down as losses and they come up with another scheme to recoup these. Even though we should never give up, and hats off certainly to the likes of PT it does get a bit tiresome (my opinion).

I would be inclined to agree if it was just a matter of one more company being fined like, say, Barclays has been, it doesn't make much difference to the rest of us. The main issue here is that Cabot are issuing lots of claims right at the time they are unauthorised. If that fact can be used in favour of the defendants, then it doesn't fall into the category above.

[meellis]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Well with the financial industry that means a fine that goes into coffers that never helps the victims, nobody held to account and then forgotten about ready for the next in a long line of scandals. Joe average abides by rules, regulations and laws in the belief they will get hung drawn and quartered but the finance industry will continue to take the p**s because they know the authorities are ineffective and they can run rings around laws due to finances so that just leaves them paying fines that go down as losses and they come up with another scheme to recoup these. Even though we should never give up, and hats off certainly to the likes of PT it does get a bit tiresome (my opinion).

[mystery1]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

My question's would be what would be the punishment and if they sorted their licence could they just re-issue claims?

2 years or a fine.

Res judicata is a bit of an issue.

M1

[meellis]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

My question's would be what would be the punishment and if they sorted their licence could they just re-issue claims?

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

In view of the above, is this something that should go in every defence where the claimant is Cabot Financial (UK) Limited? Something like: "At the time the claim was issued, the claimant was not in possession of a valid Consumer Credit License as required under s.21(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974"?

[pt2537]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Ok decided to put out on here my full reasoning why i believe cabot must hold a licence with the FCA to carry out any CCA regulated work.

Firstly, Cabot ARE assignees, undisputable, therefore the Judgment of Jones and Link helps us on this point,

In the light of that conclusion Ground 1 does not arise since Link, as legal assignee, is a creditor under the 1974 Act

So we look to section 21 CCA which states

21 Businesses needing a licence.

(1)Subject to this section, a licence is required to carry on a consumer credit business or [F1a consumer hire business or an ancillary credit business] .

so what is a consumer credit business?

s189 CCA defines this as

consumer credit business’ means any business being carried on by a person so far as it comprises or relates to—
(a)

the provision of credit by him, or
(b)

otherwise his being a creditor,

under regulated consumer credit agreements

Now that is clear, yes? a licence is required to carry on a consumer credit business and the definition covers "Otherwise his being a creditor"

So, is an assignee a creditor? Well yes, Jones v Link tells us so. but for completeness lets look at the definition of CREDITOR under the CCA!!

"creditor ” means the person providing credit under a consumer credit agreement or the person to whom his rights and duties under the agreement have passed by assignment or operation of law, and in relation to a prospective consumer credit agreement, includes the prospective creditor;

Now i cant read the above to mean anything other than, if Cabot are the assignee of a regulated consumer credit agreement, then they are the creditor and therefore they must be licenced.

I cannot see how Cabot could be argued as not being the creditor when if i make a s78(1) request to them, they as my creditor would have a duty to comply, you cant fall in and out of the law as and when you feel fit!!!!

[Berniethebolt]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Hi PT
It is a really interesting point that has been raised. I will admit that part of me wonders how such a large company could make such a cock up and that it must be legit however then I just remember how corrupt the financial world is and those that serve it, government included.

What worries me is how far it will need to go before it is stopped, how many judges will make 'mistakes' and clearly judges do make mistakes or we wouldn't need appeal courts and the supreme court or even the European Court . \

It can take years to get to the supreme court even longer to get into Europe

As for the likes of the FCA, FOS ICO etc I am afraid i do not trust them and most of the info passed to the public is from 'desk jockeys'

I am curious about the quote from nemesis as it can be interpreted in two ways
1) It is what he understands from maybe a phone call or email
2) It is what the desk jockey understands

Post 1 could easily be a cut and paste job from an email received , I'm not saying it is but it is ambiguous

[pt2537]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

So the simple point has to be, if the duties of the original creditor under the 1974 Act pass to the new creditor under an assignment, then Cabot as the assignee have an automatic requirement to be authorised.

Hicks made it clear that you cannot use agents to avoid the licensing requirements of the 1974 Act. im sorry if people disagree, im sorry if people get upset that i disagree with the FCA who coincidently dont have a duty to advise on the law and cannot give legal advice, but if someone wishes to put a binding authority on the table that says cabot can do what they are doing, then ill happily accept im wrong.

[pt2537]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Actually, i did bother to look into this, in great detail, theres an appeal ongoing at this moment which also raises the question of illegality within it, so there will be a judicial ruling from an appeal judge soon on this point.

Suffice to say that Cabot are either a creditor in which case they must be authorised , see s21 CCA and s189 which defines the words used in s21, or Cabot are undertaking ancillary debt collection business assuming they arent the creditor thus fall within the above, in which case the case of Hick shows what they are doing by appointing an agent cannot work. For completeness see s145 and 146 which explains all

forgot to mention the Judicial Ruling in Jones v Link Financial on the point about creditors under assignments.

1. In my judgment the reason for the reference to "duties" in section 189 is that an assignee only becomes the "creditor" where the statutory duties relevant to the enforcement of the creditor's rights have passed to the assignee. This will not be the case where there has been an equitable assignment of which no notice has been given. In such a case the debtor will remain legally liable to the assignor and the assignor will remain responsible for the performance of the statutory duties relating to enforcement, such as duties to provide information and notices.
2. Where, however, there is a legal assignment the debtor's liability will be owed to the assignee and it is the assignee who will have to perform the statutory duties relating to enforcement. This is not because he becomes under a contractual obligation to perform those duties, but rather because he cannot assert his rights under the regulated credit agreement without accepting the statutory obligation to perform duties under the 1974 Act relating to enforcement of those rights.

Now then, Enforcing a regulated agreement, if cabot arent the creditor, who is? who carries the duty of compliance with s77 for example? ahhhh thats easy

1. I agree with Professor Guest that this would apply to the statutory duties under ss.77, 78 (duty to give information to the debtor), ss.76, 87, 98 (duty to serve enforcement, default and termination notices), s.97 (duty to supply settlement figure), s.103 (duty to provide termination statement), and the restrictions on enforcement imposed by ss. 90 and 92. I also agree with him that different considerations may well apply to a pre-assignment liability such as that as may be imposed under ss75, 75A.

[pt2537]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Ahh the FCA talks ******** then!!

Questions were asked and I decided to find out what the situation is exactly I believe what the person at the FCA has quoted is directly from it's web site.

Nobody else has bothered to find out !
There more from the FCA but I'll leave that for now.

Actually, i did bother to look into this, in great detail, theres an appeal ongoing at this moment which also raises the question of illegality within it, so there will be a judicial ruling from an appeal judge soon on this point.

Suffice to say that Cabot are either a creditor in which case they must be authorised , see s21 CCA and s189 which defines the words used in s21, or Cabot are undertaking ancillary debt collection business assuming they arent the creditor thus fall within the above, in which case the case of Hick shows what they are doing by appointing an agent cannot work. For completeness see s145 and 146 which explains all

[Berniethebolt]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Nem
Disagreements aside I hope your son is ok. If it means anything , many major heart problems are routine these days and people go on to live full and active lives after surgery

[Berniethebolt]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

If the FCA were always right a lot of things would be different

A lot of firms would be closed or fined for breaking FCA rules

The FOS would have shut up shop for being so ineffective .

I am afraid that this makes absolutely no sense to me

I have now asked if this is the case with Cabot Financial UK Ltd and if theclaims issued prior to the Company's Interim Permissions Lapsing.

If it is being suggested that any claims issued prior to the IP lapsing are legitimate what about those that have been issued afterwards and we know that there have been many .