cabot and recon agreements

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

ps the party line here is discussion! How can we possibly learn if we don't allow free opinion? That's why the CAG is shyte at the mo - we've all got problems, they've got enough for all the other forums! No one person is bigger than a forum, same here. If I go the forum will stay!

It's a revolt I hear - run, run for the hills!!

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

Oooh fancy telling me the creditors name please matey

*intrigued*

[Paul.]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

thing is, over here, we can actually debate this kind of shyte, on the CAG you must tow the party line or else!!!!!

from this side of the fence i see District Judges take a very hardline with people who do not respond to correspondence, and a judge will be faced with difficulty where a debtor has written to the creditor with one simple line saying

" can you please address my concerns raised in the letter dated ......................... which remain unanswered"

We all know how some debt purchasers like to twist things to fit, almost to the extent of putting square pegs in round holes.

i would also say that i have seen a creditor in a recent hearing refer to this site and in particular the "just ignore" and argue that the client was simply a serial debt avoider and look at the bad advice being handed out.......... Of course the comment was used totally out of context but it goes back to twisting the facts etc.

DCAs in my view will use any argument at their disposal to win, and things like that do play on judges minds as we all know,

Judges do tend to dislike the technical legal arguments, although they are bound to follow them they dont like them. If the judge is faced with a case where the debtor is badged up as some serial debt avoider then it is my experience that the judge will try and find against the debtor if he can , however, a number of district judges whom ive met at CPD training sessions have said that if you are in the court and your case is well prepared, your evidence is in order and your client has acted appropriately then you are pushing at an open door

At the end of the day its all down to opinions, some people prefer the CPUTR 2008 to challenge creditors, i personally dont use that approach, the same goes for letters etc

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

Now I'm really confused!

If that's the case why are we so often advised to ignore? Where are the guidelines telling us when to ignore and when to reply?

There are none, it is common sense really..... However see my post above for reasons why I would say it is fine to "just ignore"...

I offer only my view from the other side of the fence so to speak.

I cannot tell you what to do, or what to ignore, all i would say is the saying thats used time and time again "if you were told to jump off a cliff would you?"

Mate that is harsh, we offer help and support here, as do you, and we don't TELL anyone to do anything - we suggest the best course of action based on past experiences - yea a freak event could always happen, as the same could happen in court - it's a game of chance at the end of the day, we both know that the law does not always prevail....

Hi guys, I have to support Paul here. Personally I have a dislike of just ignoring matters.

Point taken but on the flip side, you really don't need legal advice mate as you do most the work yourself anyway but then again you don't reply to half the stuff you get, and if you did then my next question is why? You're at stalemate so communication at this stage is futile - pointless.....

I think, based on my comments above (in red), you'll see why we suggest certain letters are ignored. Obviously any kind of threat or serious letter of any other nature is usually responded to.....

Niddy over & out

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

if you ignore, you do not have the following

A) an evidence bundle where you can show that despite best efforts to try and address your complaint the creditor has not dealt with it

* when we suggest that people ignore letters it's usually when nothing is doing, ie no contact for a year then a random statement appears or maybe whereby they have requested a CCA and the lender replied to which the debtor wrote back, and was ignored, prior to another threat coming - the fact the debtor did respond and is awaiting a reply means they are well within their rights to ignore it, for upto 28 days at which point they could if they wanted take it to the FOS (obviously not when we're speaking UE but that's the way it works, as you know).

So, you'll never see anyone on here say "just ignore" for the sake of it, it's usually based on the current and surrounding circumstances.

B) evidence of reasonable conduct
Responding to their letters is reasonable conduct from the debtors POV. However the debtor is not required to respond to each and every letter, they cannot afford this considering some dca's send 3-4 letters a week. Yea, by all means retain the creditors letters to use against them but don't reply to each one - that's ludicrous for any judge to expect this....

If you ignore, the creditor has

A) evidence of unreasonable conduct, how many times do i need to say READ HARRISON V LINK!!
Not quite that simple, cos the debtor would have already responded at some point, and is awaiting a reply and this could be proven in most cases, with the debtors audit trail of letters sent plus records from this forum if necessary!

B) a good argument to say you didnt properly explain your complaint thus litigation was reasonable and proportionate
Mate you know as well as I do that most DCA's only read what they want to read and ignore the rest, so really lets be honest - they take action cos they can. No other reason other than to kick you some more, when you're already down.

which is better? you being criticised by a judge or the creditor?
Neither - both stink of wet fish mate

See remarks in red mate! I know we've had this same old discussion several times before, but I feel I need to counter argue your legal one as it's not as simple as the guys here saying "just ignore" - ie read above then you'll see what I mean when I (or most the users here) say "just ignore"....

I know what you're saying, from a legal perspective then sure - keep an audit trail, however this has already been achieved by the time we get round to "just ignore" comments

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

Well done, result

[Susie]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

Congratulations

[ohitsonlyme]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

At long last I received my data access report requested from citi--- no wonder Cabot didnt offer any evidence about the recon and then backed out!!!

The last line of the letter reads" Unfortunately we have been unable to locate the application form under the account number you have given if you know af any previous account you may have made the original agreement under we will be happy to search again for this information."

Happy days they aint got it and dont even know the original account number that belongs to it!!

done deal!!

Onlyme

[PlanB]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

I offer only my view from the other side of the fence so to speak.

I cannot tell you what to do, or what to ignore, all i would say is the saying thats used time and time again "if you were told to jump off a cliff would you?"

Probably if it was you giving the orders

[PlanB]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

if you ignore, you do not have the following

A) an evidence bundle where you can show that despite best efforts to try and address your complaint the creditor has not dealt with it

B) evidence of reasonable conduct

If you ignore, the creditor has

A) evidence of unreasonable conduct, how many times do i need to say READ HARRISON V LINK!!

B) a good argument to say you didnt properly explain your complaint thus litigation was reasonable and proportionate

which is better? you being criticised by a judge or the creditor?

This makes the important point that even hard evidence and legal facts are open to interpretation in court. If it's looking a bit iffy at the hearing at least you can play the sympathy card with the DJ by persuading him that you did everything in your power to be reasonable but the creditor was a bully who "tortured" you MBNA found that out the hard way! If nothing else it could help the costs' issue if you lose.

Mind you if you've got Paul behind you there's no such thing as losing is there? (no pressure Paul)

[garlok]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

Hi guys, I have to support Paul here. Personally I have a dislike of just ignoring matters. I have recently had a long and deep legal conference to sort out some differences shall we say over our matters. It has confirmed a couple of things that were drummed into me a very long time ago now. Its like the Revenue and VAT man, always respond never ignore, always try to make sure when the inevitable happens that your letter is on top of the pile in your file when a judge has to look at it. Whilst you are talking there is some light, once you stop control which you had can shift to the other side.

Obviously there is quite a lot that can be just filed for future use without response but I would always err on the side of caution.

Even if it only refers to the response in Arkell v Pressdram 1971 then so be it.

regards
Garlok

[Paul.]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

I offer only my view from the other side of the fence so to speak.

I cannot tell you what to do, or what to ignore, all i would say is the saying thats used time and time again "if you were told to jump off a cliff would you?"

[alland]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

I must admit I do rather like answering letters even if its just repeating the same one they have already had but failed to address whatever was in it. I had not realised that it would be better for me that way if they ever wanted to take action.

I also feel better by keeping up a degree of dialogue with my creditors/DCA's, I answer all letters (and keep a copy of their letter and my reply to a particular dated letter) that appear to have any content regarding previous correspondence between "Them & Me" regarding the account status, even if it just repeating myself again to them.

If I ignore anything, it tends to be just the computer processed flyers, asking me to phone a number to set up a repayment plan.

[Paul.]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

if you ignore, you do not have the following

A) an evidence bundle where you can show that despite best efforts to try and address your complaint the creditor has not dealt with it

B) evidence of reasonable conduct

If you ignore, the creditor has

A) evidence of unreasonable conduct, how many times do i need to say READ HARRISON V LINK!!

B) a good argument to say you didnt properly explain your complaint thus litigation was reasonable and proportionate

which is better? you being criticised by a judge or the creditor?

[Susie]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

Plus ive gotta say doing nothing makes our job hundred times harder

Thats interesting, I must admit I do rather like answering letters even if its just repeating the same one they have already had but failed to address whatever was in it. I had not realised that it would be better for me that way if they ever wanted to take action.