Help with Cabot

[Deepie]

Re: Help with Cabot

[ATTACH=CONFIG]11671[/ATTACH]

Well it hasn't taken them long to send me a nice letter.

This is a lot more specific than any other letter I have received from Cabot - Can anyone advise on what I should do next?

Many thanks in advance,
Beefy

I'd be sending a cca request ASAP.......

[Beefy1976]

Re: Help with Cabot



Well it hasn't taken them long to send me a nice letter.

This is a lot more specific than any other letter I have received from Cabot - Can anyone advise on what I should do next?

Many thanks in advance,
Beefy

[Beefy1976]

Re: Help with Cabot

Thank you MrsD.

I have been fortunate but I did think something would happen as the SB clock is ticking.

This letter is a generic one and the letter from Cabot says Merlin will want to speak to me within 7 days.

I will let you know what happens next.

Thanks again for your reply.

Beefy

[MrsD]

Re: Help with Cabot

just wait until Marlin contact you then come on here and we'll get a suitable letter sorted out. Don't mess around with marlin get a reply off fast, they are buggers but can be beaten, you just have to make them aware that your not going to lie down and let them stamp all over you. they much prefer easy meat

[Beefy1976]

Re: Help with Cabot

Well everything has been quite quiet until yesterday.

I have had the odd letter asking if I would pay them and they have also worked out I have moved house.

Yesterday I received a 'Notice of Change' letter saying that Cabot have instructed Marlin to recover my account and that I need to contact them.

Is this fairly normal practise or do I need to worry? It becomes SB in February next year.

Thanks in advance,
Beefy

[ScabHunter]

Re: Help with Cabot

If you haven't heard anything for a month, I would definitely leave it alone. It rarely pays to go chasing DCAs, no matter what you are trying to achieve.

SH

[Beefy1976]

Re: Help with Cabot

Just a quick update to say there is no update! They seem to have forgotten me which I guess is good. I sent them a F&F offer which they have ignored...

Should I sit back and wait or send another letter referring to the F&F?

Cheers,
Beefy.

[BBoo]

Re: Help with Cabot

To get a copy of everything. You should then get copies of the default process, and you'd be able to see if it had been conducted correctly.

However, if you were in default, it is still very debateable whether they'd remove it - probably not.

[Beefy1976]

Re: Help with Cabot

IMO, it is unlikely any default would be removed in a F&F, though you may well get it marked as settled. The only way you would be likely to get the default removed entirely is if there was an error in the way it was placed on your CRF -eg- a defective DN.

I don't believe the CRA's can totally remove the default, as I imagine the ICO would probably have something to say about that.

Do you remember receiving a DN? Do you have a copy of it? If not, I'm beginning to think a SAR may be the best route to go in order to get all the information they have about your account.

Sorry for the delay in replying. I do not recall receiving the DN but they stated in one of their letters that it was sent and they don't have to prove anything regarding it. This is the only default I have, they gave me a settlement figure in the last letter they sent and stated they would mark it as settled in full if I pay within 28 days but are not able to remove the DN.

What would be the benefit be in sending a SAR?

Cheers,
Beefy

[gravytrain]

Re: Help with Cabot

Taking your point about the data controller only being responsible for actual events.

Perhaps in view of the amount of time being taken for these cases to be resolved by the fos, the initial complaint and calculations should be copied to him.

Then if legal action for damages is to be considered after the award the claimant would have a stronger claim that the data controller was negligent in the interim.

[ken100464]

Re: Help with Cabot

I would think it is a defence until they are informed that the PPI wrongfully caused the default.

ie the default was correct while the PPI was unclaimed. The data controller is processing what is before him. Its a true record until the PPI is removed.

Once he is informed the PPI is no longer within the account and therefore the default is wrong then I think things would change.

However that said and something perhaps worth thinking about if we are talking about new reconstructed balances due to PPI (for our redress) then the next logical step surely would be for the bank to reconstruct the account at the time of the default. If the balance was different but you were still not paying, the account was in arrears then surely the first default would go but they would just slap another on.

Therefore we are no further forward. It would have to be a set of specific circumstances in my mind that would need to come into play.

A terminated account so they cannot rectify. PPI redress that took the account into credit at time of default. The default is only one or will be only one on your file at some stage of its life therefore messing your CRA. I am sure there will be more but just because the redress reduces the debt it doesnt actually change how the account was operated.
And perhaps by getting a default removed you could end up with another one at a later date just because they can. Which would actually be worse

I think just getting the default off should be the prize.

[gravytrain]

Re: Help with Cabot

I wonder if anyone has gained compensation for damage done to credit record after mis-sold PPI under section 13 of the DPA.


13 Compensation for failure to comply with certain requirements.

(1)An individual who suffers damage by reason of any contravention by a data controller of any of the requirements of this Act is entitled to compensation from the data controller for that damage.
(2)An individual who suffers distress by reason of any contravention by a data controller of any of the requirements of this Act is entitled to compensation from the data controller for that distress if—
(a)the individual also suffers damage by reason of the contravention, or
(b)the contravention relates to the processing of personal data for the special purposes.
(3)In proceedings brought against a person by virtue of this section it is a defence to prove that he had taken such care as in all the circumstances was reasonably required to comply with the requirement concerned.


Would sub section 3 be a defense I wonder.

[ken100464]

Re: Help with Cabot

Yes totally agree.

Dont think the industry has quite woken up to this yet.

Surprisingly we had a Halifax account which wouldnt default and I suspected it was because they were still getting dosh out of us.

But now after we have won our PPI claim I understand that a default would have been unsafe. So perhaps Halifax actually got it right knowing a PPI claim was probable.

[gravytrain]

Re: Help with Cabot

Would tend to agree gravytrain.

It is supposed to be a factual record of how the account was run.

ICO would only be interested if there was incorrect data processing going on.

If someone gets into trouble then they cant start changing things because it suits the individual company or individual otherwise you would be able to buy and sell defaults like anything else.

Would think you would need to prove the data was incorrect. One that would come to mind would be something like a PPI ridden account where they have defaulted you and you then win it all back and more.

Your data has been processed wrongly due to the PPI element which no longer exists. So you are now being penalised into the future for something that has been corrected in real life.

Yes this is what I am looking into at the moment regarding my default on a VT'd agreement.

An authority is Durkin and others, where it was held that damages could be claimed for an incorrectly placed default.

I am reading up on the relevant case law at the moment, but as you say it is all about proving that the account was not in default so the notice should not have been recorded.

[ken100464]

Re: Help with Cabot

Would tend to agree gravytrain.

It is supposed to be a factual record of how the account was run.

ICO would only be interested if there was incorrect data processing going on.

If someone gets into trouble then they cant start changing things because it suits the individual company or individual otherwise you would be able to buy and sell defaults like anything else.

Would think you would need to prove the data was incorrect. One that would come to mind would be something like a PPI ridden account where they have defaulted you and you then win it all back and more.

Your data has been processed wrongly due to the PPI element which no longer exists. So you are now being penalised into the future for something that has been corrected in real life.