Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

BB v Cabot Appeal


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4826 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I would say that technically the debt still existed for the period of the Limitation Act. It all depends on what the letter explicitly states; are they stating they are writing the balance off?

 

Some companies may well do something called a charge off where they are removing bad debts from their accounting but the debt still exists to either be enforced in the future by the company or sold as either an individual account or as part of a portfolio (the latter being more likely).

 

Crikey... I'm up late... been struggling to sleep since my set aside hearing :-(

 

I know you posted this nearly 3 months ago but if the above is to be legal : (We assume that the debt still exists to be enforced by the OC or anyone the OC sells the debt to in this case Cabot)

 

 

1) Would the OC have to have issued a legal Default Notice?

 

2) Assuming account is sold on - does the Assignee (Cabot) have to prove that there is in existance a legal default notice issued by the OC ?

 

3) Cabot WS in this case states that they only wish to collect the arrears but I KNOW the agreement was terminated.

 

From their WS at my hearing :

 

"A notice (Default) is not required where the creditor simply demands payment for arrears, with or without contractual interest. As the claimant does not wish to rely upon any of the circumstances listed in section 87 of the CCA 1974, neither the claimant nor the assignor was required to send a Default Notice under that section or at all. The sums claimed by the claimant as assignee relate to arrears only"

 

So this is their entire reasoning for not sending a DN - but surely the point here is that without a DN in the first place the accouint was terminated without following s87 and therefore they should be thrown out on that basis?

 

Does anybody concur ?

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 245
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I know you posted this nearly 3 months ago but if the above is to be legal : (We assume that the debt still exists to be enforced by the OC or anyone the OC sells the debt to in this case Cabot) YES

 

 

1) Would the OC have to have issued a legal Default Notice? TO MARK ACCOUNT AS POTENTIAL BAD DEBT I WOULD SAY THEY WOULD HAVE TO DEFAULT AND TERMINATE OTHERWISE THEY WOULD HAVE PROBS WITH INLAND REVENUE. IE THEY WOULD ASK QUESTION - HOW COULD THIS BE A POSIBLE BAD DEBT IF YOU HAVE NOT TAKEN ACTION TO RECOVER IT?

 

2) Assuming account is sold on - does the Assignee (Cabot) have to prove that there is in existance a legal default notice issued by the OC ? ASSIGNEE TAKES ON DEBT AS IS. THEREFORE IF DEFAULTED AS DEFAULTED. HOWEVER, IF NOT DEFAULTED AND TERMINATED CAN ONLY SUE FOR ARREARS.

 

3) Cabot WS in this case states that they only wish to collect the arrears but I KNOW the agreement was terminated. PUT IT TO THEM EITHER ITS TERMINATED OR NOT, WHAT IS THE CASE? CHECK YOUR CREDIT FILE.

 

From their WS at my hearing :

 

"A notice (Default) is not required where the creditor simply demands payment for arrears TRUE, with or without contractual interest. As the claimant does not wish to rely upon any of the circumstances listed in section 87 of the CCA 1974, neither the claimant nor the assignor was required to send a Default Notice under that section or at all. The sums claimed by the claimant as assignee relate to arrears only" IF SO, THEN ACCOUNT CANNOT BE TERMINATED. THINK THEY MAY BE DIGGING A HOLE FOR THEMSELVES HERE. WAS THE CLAIM ORIGINALLY FOR THE TOTAL BALANCE ON THE ACCOUNT OR THE ARREARS?. UNFORTUNATELY YOU CANNOT CALL WITNESSES AT APPEALS AND YOU CAN'T INTRODUCE NEW EVIDENCE GENERALLY, BUT CAN IF IT IS MATERIAL (I HAVE CASE LAW IF YOU NEED IT)

 

So this is their entire reasoning for not sending a DN - but surely the point here is that without a DN in the first place the accouint was terminated without following s87 and therefore they should be thrown out on that basis? IF THEY ARE PLEADING ACCOUNT NOT TERMINATED OR EVEN DEFAULTED BUT THEY HAVE MARKED YOUR CREDIT FILE SAYING THEY HAVE IMO YOU CAN MAKE A COUNTER CLAIM ON THEM. SEEMS TO BE GETTING A BIT MESSY SO IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY DONE SO I'D SUGGEST PRODUCING A CHRONOLOGY FOR YOURSELF SO YOU CAN SEE LOGICALLY WHAT EVENTS HAVE OCCURED OTHERWISE SOMETIMES YOU CAN'T SEE THE WOOD FROM THE TREES.

 

Does anybody concur ?

 

Beau

 

A chargeoff as posted by vjohn IMO relates to the creditor marking it in their records as possible bad debt, make a provision in their acounts (provision for bad debts) can be shown as a loss in balance sheet(reduce tax liability for year it is shown as a loss). Can still enforce debt as it doesnt mean they are writing it off and if successful they would take account out of provision for bad debt and show revoered amount as profit when/if debt recovered. Company's do it all the time.

R

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought on that reasoning - If Cabot wish to only claim the arrears would the "Whole Balance" be classed as arrears as deemed by a legit DN - ie the Creditor demands full payment under "contractual law" due to the debtors failure to pay the account. ?

 

just a thought

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought on that reasoning - If Cabot wish to only claim the arrears would the "Whole Balance" be classed as arrears as deemed by a legit DN - ie the Creditor demands full payment under "contractual law" due to the debtors failure to pay the account. ?

 

just a thought

 

Beau

No, if they issue a default notice, then that has to be for the arrears and over limit sum. Paying that sum would return the account to the state it was before default. If they use the whole ballance in DN, then that is not possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought on that reasoning - If Cabot wish to only claim the arrears would the "Whole Balance" be classed as arrears as deemed by a legit DN - ie the Creditor demands full payment under "contractual law" due to the debtors failure to pay the account. ?

 

just a thought

 

Beau

 

The only time IMO that a creditor can make a claim for the full balance on the account and claim that they are arrears (no default notice and termination) is if over the course of time all the minimum payments due eventually end up as the total balance. Do you get my point? If the account is left long enough, the arrears become the total balance on the account.

 

If this is not the case, they must default and terminate complying with CCA 1974 and they must prove it. They can't sidestep this before making a claim.

 

Hope this helps some way. Have you had the transcript of the judgment yet as it would be interesting to see how DJ arrived at the judgment.

R

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, if they issue a default notice, then that has to be for the arrears and over limit sum. Paying that sum would return the account to the state it was before default. If they use the whole ballance in DN, then that is not possible.

Incorrect,

 

They are given two options with a default, one if the breach can be remedied, the action to remedy it

 

the second option provides where the breach cannot be remedied then the action the debtor must take

 

a lender may ask for the full balance if they will not allow the breach to be remedied

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you had the transcript of the judgment yet as it would be interesting to see how DJ arrived at the judgment.

R

 

Hi Robin,

 

I have had the transcript of the whole hearing for some time now

 

The DJ does not specifically say my judgment is.......but what she does go on for several minutes regarding the McGuffick case saying that this argument and that argument that I had raised in my defence had all been dealt with in the McGuffick case and were dealt with by that case.....

 

She then goes on to say that I "simply do do not have a defence, capable of of succeeding at trial and there is no other good reason to have a trial." "So it seems to me that the sensible thing to do would be to stop it in its tracks now and enable the claimant to have judgment"

 

We then go on to talk about how I am not going to pay!! and all the costs etc added.

 

Then she says

 

"Right. Well on that basis I will say defence struck out as disclosing no defence capable of succeeding and there is no other reason to have a trial. Judgment for the claimant for ...what is the total amount outstanding at the moment? .......etc

 

We then go on at some length probably another 10 mins talking about possible unlawfull charges that may have been added and finally adjourn.

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Robin,

 

I have had the transcript of the whole hearing for some time now

 

The DJ does not specifically say my judgment is.......but what she does go on for several minutes regarding the McGuffick case saying that this argument and that argument that I had raised in my defence had all been dealt with in the McGuffick case and were dealt with by that case.....

 

She then goes on to say that I "simply do do not have a defence, capable of of succeeding at trial and there is no other good reason to have a trial." "So it seems to me that the sensible thing to do would be to stop it in its tracks now and enable the claimant to have judgment"

 

We then go on to talk about how I am not going to pay!! and all the costs etc added.

 

Then she says

 

"Right. Well on that basis I will say defence struck out as disclosing no defence capable of succeeding and there is no other reason to have a trial. Judgment for the claimant for ...what is the total amount outstanding at the moment? .......etc

 

We then go on at some length probably another 10 mins talking about possible unlawfull charges that may have been added and finally adjourn.

 

Beau

 

I have now read McGuffick again and IMO I do not see how its relevant at all in your case. It seems that the DJ in your case has been either misled or has completely cxxked up in assuming that judgment is not enforcement so that awarding judgment in favour of a creditor in any CCA case is OK.

 

Remembering that McGuffick was a debtor who was the claimant in respect of a s77 breach and that it was not an issue that the originalk agreement was an Improperly Executed Agreement (common ground that agreement was properly executed). Have a look at the following paragraphs

 

p.3 ".... so that sections 61, 65 and 127 of CCA 1974 are not directly in issue"

 

P.19 ....concerned only with section 77...

 

p.21 ... QC for the bank urged the court not to embark on rulings or guidance with regard to hypothetical factual not before the court. I entirely agree...... It follws that I will only deal with matters such as the effect of sections 65 and 127 to the extent that it is necessary to do so to determine the actual issues of the case

 

p.69 .... I would still disagree that s77(4) works in exactly the same way as s127(1)

 

p.70 ... judgments in Wilson were not concernefd with redeemable unenforceability under s.77

 

p.80 HAVE A READ AS I THINK THIS IS THE CRUCIAL PARA. IMO the interpretation of this is that the bringing of proceedings is not considered as enforcement as this is what creditors need to do to get an order under s.127

 

Therefore IMO if you have an agreement that is Improperly Executed a creditor can take action through the courts to get an order allowing enforcement then you are looking to s.127(2) or s.127(3). I stand to be corrected, but no where can I see that McGuffick says that judgment is NOT enforcement

 

No doubt, subject to any other views on this, your skeleton argument will refer to some of the above points.

R

Link to post
Share on other sites

Incorrect,

 

They are given two options with a default, one if the breach can be remedied, the action to remedy it

 

the second option provides where the breach cannot be remedied then the action the debtor must take

 

a lender may ask for the full balance if they will not allow the breach to be remedied

Thanks pt. You learn something new every day, hopefully.

 

Are the circumstances where the breach cannot be remedied defineable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just an update to the action I have taken recently. I have sent a letter to Cabot asking them to go to the court and ask them for an adjournment in the Final C/O hearing - No reply as yet but that is not really a suprise,

 

I have also sent a letter to the local Land Registry office registering my objection to the application for a C/O being completed. Does not stop the process yet, but it will certainly slow it down probably much to the irritation of Cabot i would think;).

 

Robinwayrobinme,

 

Thanks for the tips on the McGuffick case I have the whole thing printed off and will be looking at the para/s as you suggest.

 

In their WS they state case law for their reliance of the interpretation of a "Creditor" in S189 of the CCA namely Linden Gardens Trust Ltd -v-Lenesta Sludge Disposals Limited (1994) 1 ac 85. When I ggogle it I cant seem to get to this judgment anybody any links? Knowing Cabot they have only quoted half of the senetence to suit themselves hoping that a unknowledgable DJ will think that must be so.

 

Thanks

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just an update to the action I have taken recently. I have sent a letter to Cabot asking them to go to the court and ask them for an adjournment in the Final C/O hearing - No reply as yet but that is not really a suprise,

 

I have also sent a letter to the local Land Registry office registering my objection to the application for a C/O being completed. Does not stop the process yet, but it will certainly slow it down probably much to the irritation of Cabot i would think;).

 

Robinwayrobinme,

 

Thanks for the tips on the McGuffick case I have the whole thing printed off and will be looking at the para/s as you suggest.

 

In their WS they state case law for their reliance of the interpretation of a "Creditor" in S189 of the CCA namely Linden Gardens Trust Ltd -v-Lenesta Sludge Disposals Limited (1994) 1 ac 85. When I ggogle it I cant seem to get to this judgment anybody any links? Knowing Cabot they have only quoted half of the senetence to suit themselves hoping that a unknowledgable DJ will think that must be so.

 

Thanks

 

Beau

Link as follows

Linden Gardens Trust Ltd v Lenesta Sludge Disposals Ltd [1993] UKHL 4 (22 July 1993)

Link to post
Share on other sites

contact the law society

 

ask them for their library where you can purchase case law reports

 

ask for

 

Crutchley v Go Debt 2009 Liverpool high court

 

before HHJ Ellery

 

in the context of the CCA, a creditor can be an assignee

 

the high court said so!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

contact the law society

 

ask them for their library where you can purchase case law reports

 

ask for

 

Crutchley v Go Debt 2009 Liverpool high court

 

before HHJ Ellery

 

in the context of the CCA, a creditor can be an assignee

 

the high court said so!!

 

Yes I spotted this at some ungodley hour last night:eek:

 

Thanks PT

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

In what context was this case cited?

 

This is in response to my original CCA request where Cabot try to say they are not the creditor in the eyes of the CCA-they did send the app form as we know but they insist for the purposes of the cca they are not the "Creditor" and therefore do not have to comply with the guidance of the CCA.

 

I quote from the Cabot WS,

 

In the house of Lords case of Linden etc..... Lord Browne-Wilkinson stated that "it is trite law that it is, in any event, impossible to assign "the contract" as a whole, ie including both burden and benefit. The burden of a contract can never be assigned without the consent of the other party to the contract...." Therefore it is submitted that the claimant is an assignee and has not been assigned the burden or liabilities of the assignor. It is therfore submitted that the claimant is not bound by a section 78 CCA 1974 request and should have been instead directed to the assignor

 

Where they cut off from Lord B-W it actually goes on to say :

 

...... in which event such consent will give rise to a novation.

 

 

It is only a minor point I know but in the context of my SA it seems to add to the body of evidence for the appeal.

 

Beau

Edited by BeauBrummie

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is in response to my original CCA request where Cabot try to say they are not the creditor in the eyes of the CCA-they did send the app form as we know but they insist for the purposes of the cca they are not the "Creditor" and therefore do not have to comply with the guidance of the CCA.

 

I quote from the Cabot WS,

 

In the house of Lords case of Linden etc..... Lord Browne-Wilkinson stated that "it is trite law that it is, in any event, impossible to assign "the contract" as a whole, ie including both burden and benefit. The burden of a contract can never be assigned without the consent of the other party to the contract...." Therefore it is submitted that the claimant is an assignee and has not been assigned the burden or liabilities of the assignor. It is therfore submitted that the claimant is not bound by a section 78 CCA 1974 request and should have been instead directed to the assignor

 

Where they cut off from Lord B-W it actually goes on to say :

 

...... in which event such consent will give rise to a novation.

 

 

It is only a minor point I know but in the context of my SA it seems to add to the body of evidence for the appeal.

 

Beau

Check out the OFT guidance out this month as I'm sure it covers this point in your favour. http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/consultations/OFT1175con.pdf p.2.4 onwards

Edited by RobinWayRobinme
aded more info
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello rjm22,

 

Member since April 07 and no posts!!! I wonder if you are just using this info for Cabot - surely not - you would'nt do that would you!!!well if you are two can play at that game - heard of mis-information!!!

 

Happy hunting

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

contact the law society

 

ask them for their library where you can purchase case law reports

 

ask for

 

Crutchley v Go Debt 2009 Liverpool high court

 

before HHJ Ellery

 

in the context of the CCA, a creditor can be an assignee

 

the high court said so!!

 

PT,

 

According to their website you have to be a practicing solicitor to become member which then gives you access to the library.

 

Can you assist in this area or maybe anyone else who would have such access.

 

Thanks

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

PT,

 

According to their website you have to be a practicing solicitor to become member which then gives you access to the library.

 

Can you assist in this area or maybe anyone else who would have such access.

 

Thanks

 

Beau

 

lol,

 

you dont go like a public library

 

you buy the case from them

 

did you ring them as i suggested?

Link to post
Share on other sites

PT,

 

According to their website you have to be a practicing solicitor to become member which then gives you access to the library.

 

Can you assist in this area or maybe anyone else who would have such access.

 

Thanks

 

Beau

 

Hi,

 

I have access BB... send me a PM and let me know what you want and I'll see what I can do.

 

vjohn82

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...