FlA is just their to support its fee paying members i will expect them to be prejudiced in favour of the creditor, and they are only advisory, not a regulator

i will have a nose many thanks

quote what you need to find is something that says it does not. This does not exist. NOW WE ARE GETTING SOMEWHERE if it does not exist, only under common law principles, yet statutory legislation/case law which has to be compatible with English common law states it is a penalty/unjust enrichment this practice WHY HAS IT NOT BEEN CHALLENGED, OR EVEN RECORDS OF CLAIMS BEEN MADE AVAILABLE Is it that no one has challenged the Status Quo on this and when a creditor is challenged, they capitulate rather than haveing a definitive case law judgement go against them, which will have an impact on the whole finance industry practice

I am looking for statutory legislation/case law which states that the creditor can charge 100% of the agreement ON TERMINATION, AND NOT BE A PENALTY i am not looking for common law principles as such, just case law/legislation that has to be compatible with common law concepts to support the argument Answer my question Simples

Credit companies jumped on the bandwagon of including the waragowski clause into their agreements/contracts until the CCA 1974 came into force, regulated or not. Dunlop is relevant as anything else charged above the 50 % termination mark will be seen as a penalty and an Unjust Enrichment to the creditor The UTTCR will then be then relevant to the above I have quoted the authority that the creditor is only entitled to claim up to the 50% termination figure in the agreement, any more is a penalty i am looking for statutory legislation/case law which states that they can charge 100% of the agreement ON TERMINATION, AND NOT BE A PENALTY

Yeoman Credit, Ltd. v. Waragowski Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co v New Garage and Motor ALL APPEAL COURT DECISIONS THAT SET PRECEDENT The Consumer Credit Act 1974 now affirms that the Wargowski clause has no relation to agreements Regulated by the CCA 1974 UTCCR, which implemented Council Directive 93/13/EEC on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts.

Rover v Siddons That is the only case that did not set a precedent as it was a county court claim Dunlop was a court of appeal and did set precedent you state most of these cases were lower court decisions which is untrue, and misleading This thread is about HP agreements, not bank charges, PPI etc Only established case law

Why do you not go to the CSA They will back date all payments since he stopped providing for the kids You will have to tell them that you hold his half of the sale of the previous property. The CSA will claim a proportion of that money to pay the arrears and awarded it to you legally Why are you protecting this ****** who would leave you and the kids with nothing??

Is that judgement not about a cause of action being a penalty, that is the claimants action wanted more than was due under common law contract as liquidated damages Private parking firms fall foul of this judgement i believe I will look over it now and many thanks for looking in This is what i am after, an opinion backed up through CASE LAW Many thanks

Just a few points You can submit a claim to the Employment Tribunal service at any time. You need not wait until any grievance of disciplinary procedure has been completed prior to any claim to the Tribunal Service It has been known for some employers to drag out any grievance procedure to "time out" the tribunal route. You can withdraw a claim at the tribunal service at any time with no penalty before any case management stage. The time limit to submit a claim to the Tribunal Service is three months LESS ONE DAY from cause of action As soon as a claim is submitted, ACAS will be informed and offer some sort of mediation without getting directly involved in the case My advice will be to submit a grievance to your employer, if no response after 14 days to that dispute, whack in an Employment Tribunal claim, it will wake them up. If the employer is then reasonable, withdraw the claim

I will have the draft posted up over the weekend

If you really want a way to improve your credit rating apply for a Cash Plus Pre-paid master card Their credit builder reports to the credit agencies each month

Vilka Do you wish to go with a set aside application ref the CCJ I can see know other choice myself as they judge can say either yes or know It will cost you £80.00, or if on benefits, low income, you can get a fee remission But you have to make that choice

It was reported last year that any future lender who sees a payday loan on a credit file will probably decline a credit application as it shows desperation and financial insecurity. I believe it was credit today that carried that story

We have time Wait for a response from Hagarty in reply to the extension request, give it a week OP is the Original poster

I realise data is shared every time a new link is made Barclay's updated my old address to my new address with the credit agencies when i informed them i had moved Why are llowell emailing me and not destroying a rain Forrest threatening hang,draw, and quarter for non compliance. "baffled"

I can accept that but i have been at my current abode for the last three years, pay council tax and on the electoral register What surprises me is that why are LLowell sending me an email, do they not have my address? that's what the electoral roll is used for

Considering i have never needed finance since 2008, or had any sort of credit check

This Has been mentioned a few times on the forum. The question that is being asked is that when you access your credit file for what ever reason, if the CRA have a marker against your name on behalf of a DCA , do they tip off any debt collection agencies? I have longed believe the credit agencies offer a subscription service to the DCA industry Now i have not had any credit in any form since 2008. I have learned to live without it and all my past transgressions have long since become statute barred. Six months ago i transferred my broadband and phone to sky, three weeks ago i transferred back to BT. BT had to do another credit check on me they said it was to make sure i did not owe BT anything. Passed credit check and phone and broadband up and running yesterday. Today i receive a phishing from our old friends LLOWELL Dear Mr POSTGGJ We hold this email address on your file and would like to use it to communicate with you - we work closely with our customers to ensure that they are given the support that they need to find the right solution for them and we would like to speak with you today. Please contact us on 0113 308 6085 to see how we can help you or if you would prefer that we didn't email you at this address - please quote XXXXXXXX when calling. Yours sincerely, James Crabtree Customer Service Manager Lowell Financial Ltd I refuse to enter into any interaction with them but do people find it a coincidence Lowell sending me an email shortly after having a credit check??

I myself do not know the answer to the question, that is why i have opened up the debate The only person i have voiced an opinion on is you in view of certain comments which you have posted I HAVE REQUESTED YOU NO LONGER POST ON THIS THREAD SO PLEASE RESPECT MY WISHES I DO NOT WISH TO ENGAGE IN PETTY ARGUMENTS OR POINT SCORING MENTALITY

Once again, this is my thread so no implied nasty comments Dodgeball you have done it to me , now another poster I WILL NOT TOLERATE TRYING TO BELITTLE ANYONE QUOTE Sorry cant do anything about your lack of knowledge, that is a matter for you. lets all be nice to each other

The above is a prime example of why i insisted at the start of this thread that i will not accept personal opinion, only facts that can be substantiated through statutory measures or case law Gastongrimesdyke has quoted the legislation, so please Dodeball, as already stated, if you wish to contribute to this debate, please supply links to support any argument, WE ALL CANNOT BE CORRECT , BEING HUMBLE TO ADMIT MISTAKES MAKES US STRONG That goes for me and everyone

Still working on it if people have any suggestions then do shout that is either statutory or case law

It looks to me like they got it in on the last day If this is a MCOL submission Issue of claim date 28/05/2013 You need to allow 5 days for postage 28 may + 14 days = 14 june + 5 days service =19 June They then have until 3 July to submit a defence

What section of the highways act??? STUPID QUESTION WHAT IS THE OFFENCE THEY SAY YOU HAVE TRANSGRESSED ???