I hope it works as I did complain to the FSO and was knocked back because they said we had been given sufficient notice to change to another lender. Sometimes though things change and what was knocked back a year ago suddenly gets accepted. Keep us updated

They did this to me for 10 years and I went to FO twice before they paid up in the end so keep going

Have one unenforceable with Egg that has been going on for some time. Nothing for months then they changed debt collector who sent this ridiculous before court action letter and I wrote that they must refer to previous correspondence to previous DCA and Egg and that we would vigorously contest any court action and they have written back saying now referred back to Egg. Happy to keep going until PT posts full info.

They are clearly summing up their chances with each of us. I have a debt of 6k which was on a loan of 20k. Turns out I had PPI that they never referred me to when I contacted them about losing job and having no money. Lots of very good letters ready for Court. They clearly defaulted me not for the loan but for the PPI plus interest. they have just returned into same account 4.5k. I have said still going to Court until debt wiped off and default removed and I will.

I work in a Law department in a University. I have sought the advice of one of the tutors who teaches Contract law and Sale of Goods. He gave me the opinion. He also confirmed that it is often up to a judge on the day

have asked for legal opinion on the agreement. In their opinion: Under paragraph titled Variations it is considered that this wording is ambiguous and unreasonable. It refers to paragraph 8 of the T&C and on the T&C sent to me that para is about care of cards etc and has no relevance therefore to that paragraph and this would make the agreement unenforceable. He also thinks that the para confirming "APR is calculated on an assumed credit limit of £100" is ambiguous as the credit limit is clearly more than that. He also wants to know if Cahoot can confirm they have a copy of the original agreement. Need to think about this all some more and would be grateful of anyone's input

great,thanks Lollipop

Really sorry to disappoint everyone but have now heard back from the FO and they have supported Cahoot. They say that we were kept informed regularly of the hikes in interest and could have paid up at any time. Very bad news

Has anyone seen on any of the threads a letter before action or PoC that can be usedin this Egg unenforceability issue . I am way down in the process as it has been going on for about 7 months and followed all the directions of PT and Militantconsumer and am holding Egg and Moorcroft at bay because clearly the agreement is wrong. Already been defaulted so nothing to lose. I need help though on the wording and terminology for Court as I want to be prepared and have had time to read thoroughly the next steps. Have searched everywhere on the site but have found nothing.Lots of us seem at the same place and need advice to the next steps.

does anyone know if there is either a template for final letter of intent or N1 form or case/statues for unenforceability. I have searched everywhere. thanks

I have been passed the following information on the case. It looks hopeful and knowledgeable. "On 8 th April 2009 Judge Halbert gave judgement on an unenforceable loan case involving a secured loan issued by Southern Pacific Personal Loans. Essentially the argument was that the loan was unenforceable because the lender had failed to treat the broker loan correctly in calculating interest and accordingly they had breached one of the prescribed terms under the Consumer Credit Act. The judgement represented a complete and unequivocal victory for the borrower. The Judge went one stage further because he also said that if he had to consider whether to exercise his discretion for another breach that wasn't a prescribed term then he would have done so, ie he would have declared the loan unenforceable even though the breach wasn't a prescribed term. The lender has filed an appeal against the decision. The judgement has encouraged a flood of cases being issued or expected to be issued out of Chester County Court. Judge Halberts proposal is that the Court should consider whether it is appropriate that certain distinct issues should be decided once and for all by test cases. The Court might also decide that there should be set directions whenever an Unenforceable irregularity case is issued at Court. A blanket stay in relation to disputed loan and credit card agreement could be disastrous for the lenders. When a borrower stops making their regular repayments the lenders response is to issue debt recovery proceedings against the borrower. If the borrower raised a defence that the agreement was unenforceable the claim would be automatically stayed pending the result of the test cases. In the meantime the lender is unable to recover money owed to them and their threats of court action are rendered toothless. "

I have contacted the Ombudsman to ask if they look enforceability when reviewing the documents. They have confirmed that they do not.

I am also updating the Egg-whatiswrongwiththem. Have managed to get doc uploaded and edited to Photobucket. Am now stuck there. I do know that Rosebyl is a person. A man who has signed off some of the letters. I agree that the unenfoceable could be put on there to update anyone else looking at the screen.

This is incredibly interesting information. I will update the second I hear from the Ombudsman whom I guess checks the authenticity/enforceability of the documentation as well.

I did get all the paperwork eventually which showed all the hikes upwards but they would not shift and so now with the Financial Ombudsman. I also think that the agreement may not be properly executed as it had no cancellation clause but I will wait for the Ombudsman to come back to me.