Having read many posts on this issue and also having been recently been threatened with a charging order on an unsecured debt. I had a close look at the CCA 1974 sec 55a. I think this will be of great interest to those threatened with loosing their home due to an unsecured debt. I would welcome well informed comments on my proposition here since I plan to start court proceedings on this soon. I far as I can see any creditor who issues a credit agreement without giving the oral explanation as detailed below is precluded from further action as described. ie putting a charge on the debtors property which could lead to their home being repossessed, or indeed taking legal action at all. Does anybody know of anybody who has had this explained to them prior to signing a simple credit agreement? Indeed would any reasonable person sign such an agreement in these circumstances. What this means in effect is that the creditor is guilty of negligent misrepresentation to put it kindly. Remember if you or I did the same in any other business it would be deemed as fraud. The good news is that misrepresentation by omission is actionable, notwithstanding that the creditor would be in breach of their statutory duties and the terms of their credit licence. Furthermore a contract that is made by misrepresentation is voidable and can be rescinded. I have copied sec 55a below. and will post again. Pre-contractual explanations etc (1)Before a regulated consumer credit agreement, other than an excluded agreement, is made, the creditor must— (a)provide the debtor with an adequate explanation of the matters referred to in subsection (2) in order to place him in a position enabling him to assess whether the agreement is adapted to his needs and his financial situation, (b)advise the debtor— (i)to consider the information which is required to be disclosed under section 55(1), and (ii)where this information is disclosed in person to the debtor, that the debtor is able to take it away, ©provide the debtor with an opportunity to ask questions about the agreement, and (d)advise the debtor how to ask the creditor for further information and explanation. (2)The matters referred to in subsection (1)(a) are— (a)the features of the agreement which may make the credit to be provided under the agreement unsuitable for particular types of use, (b)how much the debtor will have to pay periodically and, where the amount can be determined, in total under the agreement, ©the features of the agreement which may operate in a manner which would have a significant adverse effect on the debtor in a way which the debtor is unlikely to foresee, (d)the principal consequences for the debtor arising from a failure to make payments under the agreement at the times required by the agreement including legal proceedings and, where this is a possibility, repossession of the debtor's home,and (e)the effect of the exercise of any right to withdraw from the agreement and how and when this right may be exercised. (3)The advice and explanation may be given orally or in writing except as provided in subsection (4). (4)Where the explanation of the matters specified in paragraphs (a), (b) or (e) of subsection (2) is given orally or in person to a debtor, the explanation of the matters specified in paragraphs © and (d) of that subsection, and the advice required to be given by subsection (1)(b), must be given orally to him.

If the banks leave, where would they go to? Who would they find to rip off when they got there? What currency would they use? ours? We have heard this sort of whinging so many times from this shower and Amazon Vodafone David Cameron et al. Let them go and good riddance to bad rubbish. After they had paid their tax of course and refunded their depositors. Their space could easily be filled by proper traditional mutual building societies and local banks of the kind that helped build this country and made it great. As for the other so called businesses we don't need them since we have all the skills and expertise here at home. MikeG's campaign is the best thing I have seen on CAG since joining several years ago. It gets right to the core of all the problems on this forum, although I am amazed at the lack of support so far. 43 signatures! it should be 43000 by now. I strongly urge the site team to support this campaign and promote the petition with a banner headline. We urgently need to wrest control of this country from the crooks and spivs.

Please please check on the ICO website to see if they are registered. If not you are home and dry since they will be in breach of sec 17 of the act. Also see my other post.

Good news folks I have done some research on this [problem] thats come up trumps and could lead to the recovery of lots dosh,by way of court claims against the cowboys Many victims play their game and appeal to the kangaroo court. Don't do that.The law on data processing is clear please read the sec 17 of The Data Protection Act. Prohibition of Processing Without Registration. Whats that got to do with it you say? Its this! the next step is to find the cowboys registered office and make a note of the same. You then need to go to The Data Commissioners register of data controllers. Bingo I have been there and you will find that not one of these cowboys or their trade body is registered. So what again? Look at the act again sec 21 (1) Offences. What this means in effect is that by processing your data the cowboy has has committed an act that is illegal not just unlawful and subject to a fine.This means they can't plead mens rea. i.e. lack of intent even in a civil court and of course obtaining money as a result of an offence (or demanding the same) is illegal not just unlawful. Comments please

Hi, I had a very similar situation at well known school on the south coast. They tried to put a charging order on my house, things were difficult after my wife nearly died. The headmaster was known as a self appointed expert on every thing. To cut a long story short I looked at via the charity commission the schools charity status to no avail at time. However in the meantime there has been talk among some MPs and others about removing their charitable status generally. You are allowed to ask for a copy of their charter from the commissioner and question their charitable status. It is quite clear that have not acted as charitable organisation given that your family is in distress. With some backing from press this might big stick to beat them with. Being a charity they save thousands in VAT. This means in effect they are supported by the tax payer. I hope this is some help, I know first hand how difficult this is, Good luck Pavi

To all caggers and site team who come from the new age. For your erudition and future information the term "barrack room lawyer" is a used in jest. That is a person who is totally unqualified as a lawyer " laying down the law to his comrades in the barrack room" sic. Thus my use of the term in my posts, which I shall continue to use in future. With regard to the parking issue. The POPLA appeals! this is just a kangeroo court set up by the parking industry for their own ends.They have no legal mandate to "hear appeals" The more their gullible victims deal with them the bolder they become and consequently the more difficult it becomes for those of use trying to bring them to book. To illustrate my point, how many of us early caggers would have reclaimed our bank charges if we had dealt with the Retail Bankers Association? count them on the fingers of a mitten. Compared to the millions using our more robust methods. As regards parking cowboys my score is 4 nil to me. Perhaps those who advocate the kangeroo court to tell us theirs! Regards Pavi the barrack room lawyer.

Good news I have just checked the register ANPR are not registered at the address given on their web site. Unless they have registered in the meantime which I doubt. Regards Pavi

Do not respond to them I repeat do not respond to them. My wife and I have had several of these these tickets from different [problem]sters. In every case, 4 so far I have dealt with them in this way. In the meantime look them up on the register of data controllers on the net easy to find. You need their address which should be on the letters of course, It is easy to do If they are not registered they have no right to obtain or process your data because it is illegal to do so. Bingo one of the few contraventions of the DPA that is actually an offence. Send a letter send to the Data Commissioner and demand that refers the matter to the DPP with a view to prosecuting the offender. Send another letter to the DVLA data controller and ask why the have allowed an unregistered data controller to procure your data. Explain that this has caused you harm and distress which is unlawful under the terms of the Data Protection Act. You could sue them both for damages If they are registered just ignore them as I said. They get fed up after about 3 months and 4 or 5 nasty letters. Do not be intimidated by them, they are bullies just out for your money. So if in doubt take proper legal advice. Please caggers note that Capital 2 Coast Parking Management are not registered as data controllers. If you have been contacted by them re a parking issue they have obtained and processed your data illegally Inform the Commissioner and demand action as above. Regards and good luck Pavi

Debs, Sorry my post was just a comment. I have an application hearing pending re Welcome to strike out their claim and recover my losses under CCA 90 / 91 and also to have an unfair relationship CCA sec140 decided. I will post the pleadings after the hearing as this may be of use to our mutual caggers. My other post was regarding misleading and omitted terms in personal loan and credit card agreements et alia. That is to say that if they have not indicated that your home may may be lost if you do not keep up payments on your loan/card/phone agreement. In any case where this is shown to have happened the OFT has a statutory duty to prosecute the offending party. You will notice that all secured loan adds contain the caption " your home is at risk if you do not keep up the payments" which is obvious! It therefore follows that a loan taken out in good faith as unsecured, should not be later become secured by the default method of bankruptcy/charging., except where this remedy is a term of contract. Of course no sane person would sign up to a phone/card/loan agreement if it meant loosing their home if they fell on hard times. It is of course also a post contract penalty which is as we know is also unlawful. I think think there are many thousands of debtors who should be worried about this given the predatory nature of firms like Lowells who amalgamate debts to bankrupt people in financial distress with unsecured loans. In fact I feel a petition would be a start. Look what happened with bank charges PPI. Regards and a happy new year Pavi

I have had dealings with this shower and their solicitors Shoesmiths/Cobbetts and Irwin Mitchell et al. In our case they said we had gone to the bank to sign an agreement when we were away from home at the time. They produced a document in support that was for the wrong amount. CCA agreement £25k max ! they where claiming at different amounts depending on which day of the week £61k £40 k £31. The judge at my application hearing didn't even censure them but let them go away to try again. Luckily for us they got cold feet and discontinued .Perverting the course of justice is still a crime even for them I hope I may have been able to shaft the b888888tds but by that time I had enough of the stress/ heart problems so agreed to discontinue. My advice is don't trust any of them! just because they have a LLB does not make them honest and that includes the ***********. The good news is we did get a refund on charges to pay off our overdraft before this fiasco. I still have most of the bumf and my pleadings which I can post if somebody tells me how to do it. Details blanked out of course. I would be more than pleased to stand as a witness against them. Best of luck with your case, I know how stressful it is dealing with these legalised th***********. Regards Pavi

Wilco Regards Pavi Close to broke and retired but still fighting the B******s

I have been looking at this issue recently. Could one of our legal friends look at Part 2 of the UFTR 2008 Prohibitions (6)misleading omissions which are an offence under Part 3 (12). As I read it any trader that omits anything from a contract that would otherwise cause a reasonable person not to make a transaction, commits an offence. So it would be reasonable to assume that if you took out an unsecured loan your home would [not be at risk) by way of a bankruptcy petition/charging order. from the creditor should you be unable to keep up the payments on the said loan. Quite clearly no reasonable person would contemplate such an action in light of the much higher rates charged for so called unsecured loans and the risks therein. This is the test of reasonableness as per the act (more or less, please read if you are unsure.) Since the OFT is responsible for enforcing the act, they should be the first port of call. They after all insist that loan companies et alia should state " Your Home is at risk if you don't keep up payments on a loan secured on it" I think a complaint by every person affected by this should be sent to the DG of the OFT. Lets not be fobbed of to use the local trading standards as they are hopeless and no little of the legislation ( in my experience ) and are any way understaffed. This needs to be done by April next year when the local bods take over. Unfortunately the terms of the act do not provide for recession of the contract. Remember the OFT must act since there is an alleged offence. This might also provide grounds for an action under CCA 1974 sec 140 Unfair relationships ( cheaper fee by way of an application). Please note, as you might of guessed I am a barrack room lawyer, not a real one. Regards Pavi

Has any cagger noticed that Hillsden are operating from Welcome Finance address. I have an application to strike out their claim and counterclaim on HP car CCA sec 90/91.(ex Welcome). Solicitors Aspins. I will post the pleadings after the hearing early next year. I also have a load of stuff from my battle with RBS which ended in a draw/ win since I didn't pay them anything. Needless to say they submitted bogus copies of the agreement. Solicitors Irwin Mitchell ( see Private Eye so you know what your up against i terms of honesty) they discontinued in the end which I stupidly agreed to. In both these cases I have gone for an application to strike out. I also have an impending action with Lowell/ Bryan Carter but not a very good defence. However I think I found an argument against their bankruptcy debt collection tactics. I will post this for the perusal of the site legal team. Sorry if I have posted this in the wrong place. Regards Pavi

Hi Georgieboy, Apologies for the wrong name. I the think CAGers should know that these Companies are defending claims at the issue stage and mediation. Weather they turn up in court is yet to be seen in my case. They certainly have given everybody the run around as a matter of policy. I will be asking the judge to look at some CAG pages as that show their contempt for the SOG act. I not sure that this will be allowed as evidence but I will give it a try. I am also claiming for a mis sold warranty which I believe will shortly become a major consumer issue. Is the OFT looking into to this? Another 5 years of prevarication and lame excuses I guess. In my previous claims 2 rolled over before the hearing and 1 Curry's didn't turn up but that was a while ago. I will update CAgers after the hearing win or lose and post all the documents if need. Regards Pavi

Louise, Comet could not care less about breaking the law! I know since I am going to court against them on Thursday next regarding a mi sold warranty and ridge/freezer contents claim. This is after months of trying to get a resolution, including mediation. They are double dealers and spend more time trying to avoid there duties than doing anything to resolve issues. I would advise Georgieboy to log every single conversation and put complaints in writing via recorded delivery. The MD won't reply or even acknowledge receipt of LBA's / court documents but you need this for court if it gets that far.As for the CAB/trading standards they have no remit to "take over" consumer claims. In any case they are overworked and understaffed more so now due to recent government cuts. The same goes for the Ombudsman OFT/FSA if they were doing their jobs efficiently this website would not exist. All in all I think you should limit your advice to direct factual experience, not anecdotal conjecture. You could end up costing members a lot of money. I have won 2 cases in the County Court for faulty goods claims, Curry's and Dell computers, and 1 for credit card charges Capital so I have the experience. Regards Pavi