To get to the point I'd actually like advice on, I'll have to run through the story so far, I'll try to be as brief as possible.
Around 2-3 years ago I ran into financial difficulties and began struggling to pay the minimum amount on my Amazon credit card (administered by Halifax).
It didn't take long before it was referred to a DCA but, as my situation hadn't improved, I was unable to pay the amount they were requesting. After several threats of court action but none taken, I became suspicious that the debt may be unenforceable, so I sent a CCA request.
At first sight their reply looked like I didn't have a leg to stand on, but after closer inspection (and research on this site) I realised that what they had sent was merely a web application, printed and signed by me, accompanied by an unsigned CCA.
The DCA continued with the threats of court action but, to my surprise, agreed to my proposal to pay a nominal amount each month, which will take more than a lifetime to discharge.
I guess I could have not bothered with the payments but since it doesn't impact my life much, I decided it was the best way to keep the peace. However, the subsequent default on my credit file has impeded my ability to get further credit, especially mortgages.
So it was with joy that I greeted the victory of Durkin over HFC in yesterday's Supreme Court ruling. The CAG email I received this morning reports that "the judgment means that banks have a duty of care to ensure that an agreement is enforceable before they issue a default on a credit file, otherwise they are liable for damages".
This has prompted me to consider writing to ask that the default be removed from my file, but I realise that if they concede, Halifax are admitting the debt is unenforceable. It may be too early to be asking what the implications of this ruling are, but I'd appreciate any opinions or advice.