Jump to content

SteEqWar

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    30
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1 Neutral
  1. Would you like to test this in a court? If you do I would sureley like to have the person defaming me . Contact details He can private message me with his/her details if he would like to put it to the test. He attacked my qualifacations and my job. Fact One I am qualified. Fact Two it was not in the UK. Fact Three. The Judge stated that the breach of contract that BOS did was binding on other courts. "Wait for the Judgement" I am assuming that his referenced other "District Judges" in relation to this and does culminate in a type of precidence. Fact Four I am learning a lot of UK law. I hope that you're prepared to be his witness. As I said, The best thing to do is wait to see the "Judgement" For all I know the judge could be wrong but I am only stating his words. As you say you take care to get things right. I would have reserved judgement on anyone quoting something similar until seeing the judgement. I think care is out of the equasion here and I can only view this site as web review lawyers. In essence people without qualifaction and who were not party to the case in question. Basing information without the full curcumstances certainly puts you and others at a disadvantage. Again the Judges words "that the breach of contract that Bank of Scotland did in this case did binding on other courts. I see this comment as a type of presidence. Dont you? If I am wrong I would surely apologise. But I do not see as I am
  2. No problem AC, The best thing to do is see the judgement when I receive it. I agree anyone is entitled to their opinion. But as for the "sequenci" statement I am of the opinion that he/she would sooner lower the opionion of me by posting something negative about me that could lower other people's of me unless his/her statment in itself is true, The only way of finding that out is by waiting for the judgement. What "sequenci" said could be seen as libel. sequenci worded his comment to indicate that my information is inaccurate and also referenced my job. because there is a case that can be verified and there is an injured party (me) I would expect that "sequenci" withdraw his statement and apologise. The way you wrote yours I have no problems with at all Fine Regards SteEqWar
  3. And who are you "A Barister"? Your inforamtion will be shockingly wrong if you continue and as you claim you want this site to remain with accurate information. Any case brought before a court can use the merits of any case brought as long as the has similar facts. I can see that you are more interested in discrediting people and it looks like you're more interested in a slanging match. Whats the problem are you jealous that I won and you had not thought of the idea? Fact is no-one has taken there bank to court before for this type of claim. I have and I won which must mean that I know something. I put it to you that you don't really know an whole lot and no wonder lots of people end up with major problems based on the information on this site. Courts must follow their own proclamations of law made earlier on other cases, and honor rulings made by other courts in disputes among the parties before them pertaining to the same pattern of facts or events, unless they have a strong reason to change these rulings. Fact is I win my cases, I have the proof I win my cases. Where's yours? Best Wishes
  4. please yourself. You know better! at that point i don't think i can be bothered with writing anymore on this website. Fact I won and who should a care about? oh yeah me! A note Courts must follow their own proclamations of law made earlier on other cases, and honor rulings made by other courts in disputes among the parties before them pertaining to the same pattern of facts or events, unless they have a strong reason to change these rulings. I will post it on my own site have a good day
  5. I would not cease paying this type of credit agreement an waiting for them to take court action. I would take the action against the lender. That the terms of the credit agreement are UNFAIR they certainly sound like they are unfair. The problem is that the agreement amount you have is £35,000 the amount should be on what is called an unregulated credit agreement. If the agreement is on the wrong paperwork , which I have seen happen once before with Mercedes Finance where they wrote the agreement on consumer credit act 74 agreement in would look like the agreement doess not match the prescribed terms of law and thus would be unenforable I hope this information helps
  6. Upon reading the case law in this case, It is apparent the claimant could not get an injunction because he had previously defaulted on the credit agreement. In this case refering the information to CRA's cannot be seen as a type of enforcement of the agreement but a truth of the fact that the claimant had defaulted many times. I do not see this case as a very good test case. I would like to know of anyone who had perfect credit up until the time the agreement was deemed unenforcable. This would shed a better light on the whole situation. For those guys who know me on here and know that I had a case going through the court system yesterday. You can note that I won that case. The case is Jones v Halifax Ltd (Part of Bank of Scotland PLC) 23/10/09 Wolverhampton County Court The case is the first of kind so creates case presidence The case was to do with blocking of debit cards for believed fraud whilst you are abroad, Anyone who has ever had this happen in the past and has suffered a loss becasue of should read the judgement as soon as it becomes available. I will post it on here and also on my own website. The bank relied upon there terms and conditions ie clause 11.6 that if they believe that the card is being used by someone other than the card holder they can block the card without contacting you first. They also maintained to state that I must inform them of all travel plans. Fact was I was totally unaware of this situation the bank did not supply any documentation to me requesting me to do so. In court they tried to supply a document allegedly sent to me with the bank card. Unfortunatly for them. I had the original which must mean they used incorect paperwork in the case. The fact that we go abroad to the same location very frequently and the transaction attempted was not out of place only proves that the transaction was genuine. Halifax lost because of a breach of contract. Net result Jones £3000 Halifax 0 judgement in my favour
  7. My site is hosted on my servers in Arizona and the site is factual ......the site theyre talking about is not my site and its also hosted on Arizona servers this time owned by Go Daddy Yes I have seen the Godfrey vs. Demon case
  8. As I said its not enforced the CCA2006 did not repeal it ,,,,If it did repeal it no one would be claiming unenforcable credit agreements right now . You cant have bits of legislation covering one bit but not the other ,,,,,read CCA 2006 it takes unenforcability out of the equasion.... You are right about one thing though i read law on the internet from government websites as not every single word is in my brain. If you guys think im from the other side you should check out my other posts here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bailiffs-sheriff-officers/65153-equita-caught-handed-2.html Good night guys it was fun some of us have to work in a legal office tomorrow where there are solicitors.... hehe better tell them not to look up anything on the net..... not unless they come speak to all the solicitors on here first.... have fun guys
  9. oh my we having fun with legal debate, fact is if they removed the offence section out of the CCA under 80 you would also be entitled to have an Hire Purchase Agreement on a car not pay for it and not tell them where the car is,,, This is an offence,,,,,, Any Claims Co that tells you that you could keep your car are bs-ing you. Its a danger when people talk about newbies on sites like this ,,,, its apparent that the oldies dont like the newbies giving them facts. If the law was about the day the agreement was written hence before April 07 and its now 09 ,,,,How come I have a job? lol stating it the way you did would mean that the law only lasted for one day. Fact is it goes on when the agreement was commenced other thing mentioned was that Credit Card Agreements don't have a total charge for credit. course they do and the law states this 60.—(1) The Secretary of State shall make regulations as to the form and content of documents embodying regulated agreements, and the regulations shall contain such provisions as appear to him appropriate with a view to ensuring that the debtor or hirer is made aware of— (a) the rights and duties conferred or imposed on him by the agreement, (b) the amount and rate of the total charge for credit (in the case of a consumer credit agreement),
×
×
  • Create New...