I think there's about 5 standard letters which they send, and after letter 5, it defaults back to letter 1. Just ignore it, they can't do a thing 👊👊👊

Graham, I can absolutely help you untangle this — and I’ll do it in a way that keeps everything calm, accurate, and grounded in general procedural information, without drifting into legal advice. Let’s break this down cleanly so your member can understand what CPR 23 and CPR 27 actually do, and where the confusion is coming from. ⭐ First: CPR 23 and CPR 27 are not opposites, and they don’t “cancel” each other They do completely different jobs. CPR 23 Covers general applications — the mechanism you use to ask the court to do something in a live case. Examples include: - asking for disclosure - asking for directions - asking for a transfer to a different court - asking for an injunction - asking for declaratory relief - asking for a hearing - asking for a stay You make a CPR 23 application after a claim exists. That’s why Peter said: “It must be done on a live case where a claim number has been issued.” That part is correct. CPR 27 This is the Small Claims Track rule. It governs: - how small claims are run - what evidence is allowed - what the judge can do - what costs are allowed - how strict the rules are And yes — CPR 27 gives judges wide discretion, which can feel unpredictable. But CPR 27 only applies after allocation. ⭐ So the key point: CPR 23 is not a “weapon” to stop CPR 27. It’s simply a mechanism to make an application before the case is allocated to the small claims track. That’s why people talk about “getting in first”. ⭐ Now let’s address the specific misunderstandings in the member’s message 1️⃣ “CPR 23 is our ‘fuck you’.” Not really. CPR 23 is just the standard way to make an application. It’s not a special loophole or a magic override. It doesn’t automatically: - force disclosure - force transfer - block CPR 27 - move a case to Chancery It’s simply the route you use to ask. The court still decides. 2️⃣ “We can use CPR 23 on an N1 when filing a claim.” This is where the confusion is. ✔ You can issue a claim seeking:

⭐ Assessment of the Cabot Situation What the member is describing is classic Cabot behaviour, and none of it changes their rights or the legal position. Let’s break it down clearly. ⭐ 1. Cabot cannot extend a SAR deadline by 2 months just because they feel like it Under UK GDPR, a controller can only extend the SAR deadline by up to 2 months if: - the request is complex AND - they notify the data subject within the original 30 days - and they explain why it is complex Cabot ignoring SAR1, then suddenly claiming a 2‑month extension after SAR2, is not valid. This is non‑compliance. ⭐ 2. Their refusal to provide the Deed of Assignment is nonsense They often say: “You have no right to see it.” “It doesn’t contain your personal data.” Both statements are misleading. The truth: - If the DoA contains any personal data relating to the debtor, it must be disclosed under a SAR. - If it genuinely contains no personal data, then Cabot cannot rely on it as evidence of assignment in any enforcement action. - Saying “it has no personal data” is effectively saying “we have no proof this debt relates to you.” So yes — the member is right to raise an eyebrow. ⭐ 3. Cabot classing SAR2 as a complaint is a known tactic Debt collectors do this to: - delay the SAR - move the issue into their complaints process - avoid admitting non‑compliance - buy time - confuse the consumer A SAR is not a complaint. They cannot reclassify it to suit themselves. ⭐ 4. “Go through Mortimer Clarke” is another deflection tactic Mortimer Clarke are Cabot’s in‑house solicitors. A SAR must be answered by the data controller — Cabot. They cannot: - outsource it - redirect it - tell you to contact a solicitor - pass responsibility to a third party This is unlawful. ⭐ 5. Should the member bother with Mortimer Clarke? No. A SAR is to Cabot. Cabot is the controller. Cabot must respond. Mortimer Clarke has nothing to do with SAR compliance. ⭐ 6. Should the member send SAR3 (Final Notice / LBC)?

Apparently, if you watch the Wizard of Oz film and listen to Pink Floyd's album 'Dark side of the moon' at the same time (starting the album when the lion roars), they're both supposed to match up 👍

Assessment for the Member – Filing in Chancery / High Court Bundles Here’s the clear, accurate guidance you can pass on: 1. What Peter actually said Peter’s comment on the thread is very specific: - If the case is going to the Rolls Building, the bundle must be filed using their electronic filing system (CE‑File). - Other High Court venues vary, and you must check with the specific court handling the matter. That’s the factual baseline. 2. Practical Explanation (in plain English) When you MUST file electronically If the claim is issued in, transferred to, or being heard at the Rolls Building (Royal Courts of Justice, London) — which covers: - Chancery Division - Insolvency & Companies Court - Commercial Court - Technology & Construction Court - Admiralty Court — then CE‑File is mandatory. You cannot walk in a paper bundle. They will reject it. When you might be able to file a paper bundle If the case is being heard in a regional High Court District Registry (e.g., Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds, Bristol, Cardiff, Newcastle), then: - Some registries accept paper bundles, - Some require CE‑File, - Some accept either, depending on the judge and listing office. There is no universal rule — it genuinely depends on the venue. 3. What the member should do next Here’s the safest, most reliable process: Step 1 — Identify the exact court handling the hearing Not just “High Court” — the specific building and division. Step 2 — Check the court’s listing office A quick call or email to the court’s admin office will confirm: - Whether CE‑File is mandatory - Whether paper bundles are accepted - Whether both are required (some judges want both) Step 3 — If CE‑File is required The member will need to: - Create a CE‑File account - Upload the bundle as a single PDF (usually bookmarked) - Pay any required fees online - Ensure the file size meets the limits (usually 50–100MB) If they struggle with electronic filing, you can reassure them: CE‑File is fiddly at first, but once you’ve done it once, it’s straightforward.