
EssCee
Registered UsersChange your profile picture
-
Content Count
26 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Community Reputation
7 NeutralAbout EssCee
-
Rank
Basic Account Holder
Recent Profile Visitors
The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.
-
Voluntary Termination with Startline
EssCee replied to TheDude1's topic in Vehicle Finance and Vehicle Repossessions
The dfn point is not an easy argument at all with fixed sum hire purchase with fixed repayments, but worth a shot. Could you argue estoppel in that they made representations the agreement continued in subsequent letters and notices which you relied upon to your detriment? Just thought vomiting here. -
Voluntary Termination with Startline
EssCee replied to TheDude1's topic in Vehicle Finance and Vehicle Repossessions
Because per doc1 above DFN 8th March 2017 termination 30th March 2017... -
Voluntary Termination with Startline
EssCee replied to TheDude1's topic in Vehicle Finance and Vehicle Repossessions
DFN is dated 8th March 17 and gives 21 days for compliance and appears to be in the prescribed format. if the arrears are not overstated it's good and so is their termination if I were you I'd complain on the misleading info and s140a and look to refer to the FOS and see where it gets you. Legally assuming the DFN is good, as it appears, you lost the right to terminate as they have said IMHO -
Voluntary Termination with Startline
EssCee replied to TheDude1's topic in Vehicle Finance and Vehicle Repossessions
S98 consumer credit act dx. But it's a moot point if the DFN is compliant as the nosia issue doesn't invalidate it -
Voluntary Termination with Startline
EssCee replied to TheDude1's topic in Vehicle Finance and Vehicle Repossessions
Not surprised, as per post #28. Perhaps try the s140a avenue. -
EssCee started following Voluntary Termination with Startline
-
Voluntary Termination with Startline
EssCee replied to TheDude1's topic in Vehicle Finance and Vehicle Repossessions
Sorry, late ro the party on this but.... Given a breach of s86B gives rise to temporary unenforceability under the CCA until remedy and an inability to charge during the period of non compliance and considering that enforcement is held as being entering judgment What grounds are there for suggesting the DFN and termination are invalid? Also if the DFN was somehow invalid what makes the termination invalid (Could it be treated as a simple termination of contract outside of provisions for breach)? In which case could it be unlawful? Start line do appear shoc -
Question, regarding cause of action on a statute bar!
EssCee replied to jandia's topic in General Debt Issues
Bmw v Hart re unregulated hp has little application in the Times. We cha agree to disagree. -
Question, regarding cause of action on a statute bar!
EssCee replied to jandia's topic in General Debt Issues
It has determined the date from Which cause of action arises for the purpose of the limitation act. In that respect it is cast in stone barring an appeal to the supreme court Arguments can be made where there is some egregious delay in issuing a default notice that it gives rise to an unfair relationship under s140 cca but that's a different argument, though one touched on in Doyle and which a district judge would likely find persuasive when considering any prejudice asserted. As an aside registering a default with a CRA is an entirely different matter to a creditor iss -
Question, regarding cause of action on a statute bar!
EssCee replied to jandia's topic in General Debt Issues
That's what forums are for, learning and sharing knowledge -
Question, regarding cause of action on a statute bar!
EssCee replied to jandia's topic in General Debt Issues
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/12.html Here you go fodder. -
Question, regarding cause of action on a statute bar!
EssCee replied to jandia's topic in General Debt Issues
Its a determined point of law. Of someone argues purely limitation on facts where the default notice expired within 6 years of the claim being issued they will lose it's that simple. If they take other points (for example the agreement is unenforceable for want of a prescribed term) and win on that it doesn't detract from the limitation argument being wrong in law. -
Question, regarding cause of action on a statute bar!
EssCee replied to jandia's topic in General Debt Issues
Depends entirely on the nature of the contract, the nature of the breach and of the claim. A contract may require Notice of Breach, or a Demand in order to bring terms in to effect and missing a payment may not be a sufficient breach (not of the essence) as to give rise to a claim for termination/repudiation or indeed anything other than payment of the missing instalment and nominal damages. In terms of Consumer Credit debt, Doyle binds the Court in all matters, otherwise than where a debt is payable on demand. We must be talking about debt other than payable on demand here, given -
Could fall within S4 of the Fraud Act 2006 BF, certainly fits in with the definition of Theft, guess we won't find out which the CPS prefers as the OP isn't going that route. £489 p/h solicitors rates seems to fall within the Theft Act too, that's an astounding rate. It is odd that Ladbrokes cannot trace an account with the details you have given (presumably the details of your wife), are you positive she gave her details and not (and this would be a major complication) yours as presumably she would know them all?