Cabot Financial UK Ltd

[Berniethebolt]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

I think only a fool would rely on the one aspect of a defence when they have others . Thats why so often a defence will start saying for example it is SB then go on to list no CCA, defective default etc . Start with the strongest and work down

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

No offence intended just seen to many things like this go before the courts with a LIP and be totally ignored so I would like somebody make the case stick. We are all aware that the FCA aren't interested or have differing interests yet I read a lot of these rules the same way you are interpreting them but it falling on deaf ears. That's where the importance of people like PT plays out because the courts will listen more to the legal profession than they will a LIP.

So far everyone's been submitting the usual defence of not having received any documents, lack of compliance with s.77/78 of the CCA, etc. and not restricting themselves to the authorisation argument, just using it as one more weapon in their arsenal.

[Berniethebolt]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

It totalled over 150 complaints 2012/2013 collated and offered as " reports and information on the conduct of............."
It was the OFT that placed the "requirements" on MMF which are continued by the FCA.

nem

I know you were collating complaints but I was told that nothing had happened with them and certainly not pre Nov 2014
When my complaint was dealt with in June 2014 onwards (so FCA time) there were no requirements on their licence . During the course of my complaint they actually changed their home page to make it more compliant . As I say I was in touch with the FOS and the FCA .
Also if you check the register the requirements have only been since Feb 2015 so certainly no OFT involvment

[nemesis45]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

I am delighted that MMF have got their comeuppance however it took a very very long time for it to happen. If memory serves me you were dealing with that in 2012 . It is good to hear that the people who told me the complaint was not going forward had got it wrong.
I know I made two complaints to the Fos and OFT in that time about these people.
Interestingly I was not informed by them of any changes but i suspect they closed my accounts

It totalled over 150 complaints 2012/2013 collated and offered as " reports and information on the conduct of............."
It was the OFT that placed the "requirements" on MMF which are continued by the FCA.

nem

[Berniethebolt]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

I am delighted that MMF have got their comeuppance however it took a very very long time for it to happen. If memory serves me you were dealing with that in 2012 . It is good to hear that the people who told me the complaint was not going forward had got it wrong.
I know I made two complaints to the Fos and OFT in that time about these people.
Interestingly I was not informed by them of any changes but i suspect they closed my accounts

[nemesis45]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Well even you are proven correct in your doubts, on the face of it the available information from the REGULATORY AUTHORITY says the license lapsed on 28/02/15 and i would submit that "reasonably sure" test that you seem to want to apply would certainly be passed. How expensive can it be in costs to ask them to prove a valid license in any event ?

M1

On the present status I would address this as soon as a claim is received IF Cabot Financial UK is specified as the claimant.

There are Interim Permissions for, Cabot and Cabot Financial trading styles showing on the Interim Register which may
confuse matters.

nem

[mystery1]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Certainly but one must be " reasonably" sure of the foundation
for making a claim such as this and at present my feeling more
proof is needed.
nem

Well even you are proven correct in your doubts, on the face of it the available information from the REGULATORY AUTHORITY says the license lapsed on 28/02/15 and i would submit that "reasonably sure" test that you seem to want to apply would certainly be passed. How expensive can it be in costs to ask them to prove a valid license in any event ?

M1

[nemesis45]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Why would you not put the claimant to proof of something doubtful, particularly when it can be a win ?

M1

Certainly but one must be " reasonably" sure of the foundation
for making a claim such as this and at present my feeling more
proof is needed.
nem

[mystery1]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

my
only reservation is that this should not be included in every defence to a Cabot claim.

nem

Why would you not put the claimant to proof of something doubtful, particularly when it can be a win ?

M1

[mystery1]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

The alleged illegality has to be tested, the FCA is not authorised to give legal advice or to disclose what actions
it has taken or proposes to take.

They can answer the question of licensing. The fact that not having it makes certain actions illegal is neither here nor there as far as asking the fca to state whether a company is licensed or not. If the FCA cannot say if they have a license yet the website says they don't who has won the argument on the balance of probability ?

M1

[nemesis45]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

No offence intended just seen to many things like this go before the courts with a LIP and be totally ignored so I would like somebody make the case stick. We are all aware that the FCA aren't interested or have differing interests yet I read a lot of these rules the same way you are interpreting them but it falling on deaf ears. That's where the importance of people like PT plays out because the courts will listen more to the legal profession than they will a LIP.

The FCA has in fact been very helpful and I have an ongoing inquiry/report on the conduct of Cabot in hand!
The alleged illegality has to be tested, the FCA is not authorised to give legal advice or to disclose what actions
it has taken or proposes to take.

A good example of how the old OFT and the FCA can and does react to consumer reports is the entry on the
the CC Register for Motormile Finance.
I was actively involved in making a " mass " report on this company's conduct it's worth a read.

nem

[meellis]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

No offence intended just seen to many things like this go before the courts with a LIP and be totally ignored so I would like somebody make the case stick. We are all aware that the FCA aren't interested or have differing interests yet I read a lot of these rules the same way you are interpreting them but it falling on deaf ears. That's where the importance of people like PT plays out because the courts will listen more to the legal profession than they will a LIP.

[nemesis45]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

That's all very well if they're licensed and own the debt and are the claimant. If they aren't licensed then game over. If they own it but are not the claimant, game over. If they are licensed but not the claimant, game over.

Not sure why this is becoming so complicated to be honest.


Are they licensed ?

NO - unenforceable and criminal s39 & 40 CCA.

Yes :-

Are the claimants the correct company ? (do they own it)

No, no locus standi.

Yes, proceed like any other case.

I think i might ignore anything else now. If people want to use it fine. If not they're daft.

M1

No one especially me is ignoring this there is a suspicion that the is an irregularity which may allegedly be an illegality but is not confirmed my
only reservation is that this should not be included in every defence to a Cabot claim.

nem

[Berniethebolt]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

Hope you don't ignore [MENTION=5354]mystery1[/MENTION]

The whole thing is very interesting

I want to see Cabot get spanked , I think your comments are very insightful

[mystery1]

Re: Cabot Financial UK Ltd

I think all of these entities move the assets around depending on what suits them. Doubt if its legal but nobody seems bothered, they have probably re-financed the same assets in the different entities and people are aware of it but again nobody seems bothered.

That's all very well if they're licensed and own the debt and are the claimant. If they aren't licensed then game over. If they own it but are not the claimant, game over. If they are licensed but not the claimant, game over.

Not sure why this is becoming so complicated to be honest.


Are they licensed ?

NO - unenforceable and criminal s39 & 40 CCA.

Yes :-

Are the claimants the correct company ? (do they own it)

No, no locus standi.

Yes, proceed like any other case.

I think i might ignore anything else now. If people want to use it fine. If not they're daft.

M1