cabot and recon agreements

[garlok]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

Something I did neglect to say was it has to be a part of the arguement that this information is necessary anyway to enable the alleged debtor to come to valid conclusions as to how to proceed.

regards
Garlok

[MINNACK]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

good morning everyone

i have been away for a while so not been on here.

i beat cabot. i beat them!

if anyone needs to know how and why pm me and i will tell all and try and help you if i can.

not being paranoid - but i reckon those gits look at all these forums etc

all the best
minnack

[garlok]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

Well done MINNACK!

Yes all the creeps watch out on these forums. Many try to infiltrate but we keep a close watch and those that want to cause trouble are banned.

regards
Garlok

[Susie]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

VERY well done Minnack, that really is great I am pretty certain they look on here as well so your probably not as paranoid as you think

[helmsman]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

good morning everyone

i have been away for a while so not been on here.

i beat cabot. i beat them!

if anyone needs to know how and why pm me and i will tell all and try and help you if i can.

not being paranoid - but i reckon those gits look at all these forums etc

all the best
minnack

Well done, I have 3 accounts with Cabot at the moment so could very well be useful to me and others Cabot have their claws into. Thanks for the offer to help others.
All the best.

[greymatter]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

Hi Garlok
You said:
'I have also discovered very recently that a school of thought now exists amongst several professionals that they are working towards making pre April 2007 agreements and s61/s127 arguments a thing of the past.'
So how firm is this move?
Jesus Christ are they taking everything away from our defences.Its about bloody time the Law changed in our favour.
Surely if this were to get the go ahead the pond feeders would be out in their droves.
Give us a glimmer of hope here!

[garlok]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

Hi greymatter,

If you read the first post in my diary you will see what has happened. In the recent meetings we have had to resolve the contention with our legal reps. it came to light that junior members of staff, i.e. legal execs who not fully qualified solcitors are beginning to handle more and more of these cases. In some ways because we all are not in a position to pay out huge fees.

Most of them are not like Paul our moderator here and confuse things or try to fob you off treating clients much in the same way as the DCAs do i.e. we are the idiots. The disturbing feature I found was that the people who had almost cocked up our cases were running under the illusion that all agreements had to be treated under the aupsices of the 2006 amendments to the CCA. Wrong of course. s61/s127 still applies to those of us with prior dates etc. and will always be so on fundamental principle of English Law and fully reinforeced by the EU court of human rights and the Lisbon Treaty.

The problem exists or will exist more correctly because you can be damn sure that the parasites will exploit this in a case, get a ruling and it will be hell's own game to sort it like the Carey issue has become. I have stemmed it in the bud shall we say from our own point of view and qualified staff are now running our files when we need it.

Hope that clears the air for you.
regards
Garlok

[PriorityOne]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

It is hard to find a good solicitor; you are placing so much trust in their hands.

I made an appointment to see one many years ago after being tracked down by my old mortgage company. If I had followed his advice, I would have lost everything.

Fortunately, gut instinct kicked in, I walked away and managed to keep everything by communicating with the company directly myself.
There are good and not-so-good in all walks of life........ people just need to be careful.

[greymatter]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

Garlok
Many thanks for clearing that up for me.
What a minefield eh!

[garlok]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

I always assume and try to plan for the worst when dealing with this shower in the debt sector I can tell you.

Choosing legal reps can be a total minefield. I thought I had some pretty good criteria but even those loosed me down. However, much is back on track now but even this week if I did not know better and was just someone coming into this I would have been misled into believing there is not a chance to fight back and that I had better think about total capitulation. Lose everything. So taking back control of the day management of the file.

I think, from my own personal thoughts around this having had a couple of days to think, that the real danger will come from some inoccuous case(s) that some junior will have not prepared properly and then it/they fall against the debtor. Like Carey this will then be used at every opportunity by the parasites to twist every other case they can get at. Take Carey for instance, the very engineers of that debacle appear not to even understand that there are some good points in there if exploited to the full on our behalf, but how many times do you hear about those aspects---- rarely if ever.

regards
Garlok

[PriorityOne]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

Like Carey this will then be used at every opportunity by the parasites to twist every other case they can get at. Take Carey for instance, the very engineers of that debacle appear not to even understand that there are some good points in there if exploited to the full on our behalf, but how many times do you hear about those aspects---- rarely if ever.

regards
Garlok

I've lost count of the number of times Carey and/or McGuffick have been quoted to me by creditors/DCAs trying to justify themselves and pull the wool... I've written back each time letting them know that if they're going to cherry-pick, to at least get it right...

Paras 108 and 234 are the ones to look at....

[garlok]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

Hi P1,

You don't know how relieved I am to see you say that. I have been preaching s108 and s234 for a long time now and I was beginning to think that I was the only one out of step. Whenever I hear "reconstitution" my mind flips immediatedly to "think 234, original, original, original, original"

Phew!!

regards
Garlok

[PriorityOne]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

Hi P1,

You don't know how relieved I am to see you say that. I have been preaching s108 and s234 for a long time now and I was beginning to think that I was the only one out of step. Whenever I hear "reconstitution" my mind flips immediatedly to "think 234, original, original, original, original"

Phew!!

regards
Garlok

Please see below; adapted from a thread I started OTR:

HHJ Waksman in Carey v HSBC stated that reconstituted Agreements are not in themselves proof of execution, which means that although creditors/DCAs may comply with a s77/78 request by sending a reconstituted version in response, arguing that they have fulfilled their obligations.... if it is not a copy of the executed Agreement, then they'll have trouble taking it through the courts, providing that action is defended properly. Paras 108 and 234 of Carey state that copies of executed Agreements must be taken directly from the original format; ie, from the original Agreement, including any variation of terms, where applicable.... so people need to push for written confirmation of precisely how that information could possibly be obtained when there is no Agreement to take the info. from (allegedely)? In other words, upon what doc. did they base their reconstituted blurb?

Banks and DCAs like to quote from a number of cases, including Carey; cherry-picking the bits they like.... but conveniently forgetting that in each case, the debtors (consumers) were claimants each time; meaning that the burden of proof rested with the claimant (consumer) each time.... but of course, they don't like to draw your attention to this fact.

If people suspect that any company hassling them for payment is being economical with the truth (so to speak) and leading them to believe that they have genuine documents when in fact they don't, then ask for confirmation under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations (CPUTR) 2008 which in my case, has flushed them out quite nicely..... and avoided lots of nasty court action.

[garlok]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

The other thing that keeps getting over looked in Carey is that HHJ Waksman actually said "in the absence of positive assertions" (of not signing a compliant document) in Yunis and Adris their cases fell. Using the banks own methods of interpretation, it also tells you that had they made those assertions then even though they were claimants and the onus of proof fell to them they may still have won the case. It is impossible to prove a "double" negative in law. The bank defendant would have had to produce the original document literally to have refuted those assertions.

Secondly a deep analysis of 234 suggests that a full audit trail could be demanded by a defendant debtor of every variation thoughout the lifetime of the agreement which would include reference to the original document as is stated clearly in 234. Most banks don't know what happened last week or even yesterday let alone over a loing run of some 25 years in cases like our own.

regards
Garlok

[Paul.]

Re: cabot and recon agreements

These were claimant cases where the burden is on you to prove on balance of probabilities that X did or did not happen.

Carey was a train wreck from the begining.

I have found many methods around carey when presented with such arguments, many of the results weve had have been posted on here.