LTSB Court claim - help please

[Undercover-Elsa]

Hi Remus,

In answer to your query on the Tale of a Dodgy DN - Further Discussion thread, SX20 meant that the party was over for the Creditor.

Viz Brandon, as gh says the circs are different, so you need to trash their argument and additionally try to show that you were prejudiced by their error.

As Brandon is still not determined (a new hearing for permission to appeal, under 3 judges, is scheduled for 3rd February)

they should not be allowed to rely upon it. It may be grounds for you to request a stay pending the appeal application results.

 

You've got a great team helping you on here

 

Good luck,

Elsa x

[remus]

thanks for the reply Elsa, I am getting confused as SCM have written recently that I terminated the agreement, if that is the case then surely by what SX20 has posted they have no case?

 

I believe they are using the Brandon case to show, even though the DN did not give the required time, I was not in a position to pay, and hey here's the proof (?) records show you terminated the agreement.

 

Just trying to get my head round it all.

 

remus

[gh2008]

If you terminate the agreement then the balance is payable - if they terminate (on the back of a faulty DN) they only entitled to lawful arrears at termination

 

I think you may have an idea of what they are getting at ....

 

Have a read here to see it in action http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?257032-RBS-Mint-Loan-Court-Action-Started-amp-Dodgy-DN-issues/page5

 

This was the first time I ha seen this argument - the legal argument is there almost to trial in that thread

Having re-read a bit - I think my post top of page 6 could also be worth exploring

[remus]

Hi gh2008,

 

if the account is closed and passed to a debt collector, how much more terminated could it be?

[gh2008]

I haven't re-read your case, but from your recent comments is anyone arguing that it is not terminated, rather they are arguing when and by whom.

 

If that is not the argument then just ignore me

 

However if they are suggesting that you terminated the agreement (which you are able to do within the CCA) and you acknowledge that then you may be liable for the full balance outstanding. (or t least total amount payable - less any early repayment discount if applicable)

[remus]

Hi gh2008,

 

Sorry, I hear what you are saying. would I have had to sign something, or write a letter saying I wanted to terminate the contract? And as they have closed the account I assume, (correct me if I'm wrong) no 2nd default can be issued and also no interest added on after the date of intended termination? or is the word intended bought into play:???:

 

I did write saying my circumstances had changed and I was unable to maintain payments at the given rate, but could offer x amount. My letter was dated the same date as the enforcement letter, so there is no-way they would have received my letter prior to their letter, giving me notice that they intended to terminate 7 days later.

:madgrin:remus

[cymruambyth]

I think they can argue that as you failed to maintain the contractural repayments you terminated the agreement.

[gh2008]

by not maintaining payments you breach a term in the agreement, but the agreement still persists. The CCA is very clear about that.

 

The argument in the thread i linked to was that the debtor terminated when they accepted the unlawful rescission.

The debtor's argument is that the creditor terminated when they sent a letter saying 'we have terminated the agreement'

 

If the former then the balance is owed - if the latter only arrears at termination.

 

That *may* be the line they are trying to take here, don't know, but just a heads up re what you reply that's all - it could prove expensive ......

[remus]

thanks for your response gh2008,

 

until today, I had no idea that who terminated could have such an effect on the out came (nor the amount of smilies on here)

 

thanks for your time, and a Happy New Year to you and all Cagger's

[gh2008]

ooooo new smilies :llama: although why do we need dancing llamas!!!

 

Oh well, yes, read that thread I linked to, the Witness Statements from the Claimant reveals the legal argument (and one which I think should be more widely broadcast on CAG to avoid the unwary getting drawn in...)

 

Happy New Year and all that

[remus]

Hi all,

 

If the formal demand for full payment of monies outstanding is sent, can charges be added after that date?

 

note- I never received this, and apparently copies are not kept by the claimant, (even though the sols sent it out) and they are not compelled to do so by the cca.

[gh2008]

was the agreement still 'live' at the time? if yes then are the charges applied contained within the agreed terms & conditions of the account?

 

If the account was terminated and therefore the agreement not longer endures then it is less clear imho. They can add them, but as to whether they are lawfully owing is another matter.

[remus]

Hi gh2008,

 

1st Enforcement notice with intention to terminate, date 7 days later, then DN dated 8 days later, the no copy for anyone, Formal Demand, apparently dated 2 months later, closure of account 15 days later.

 

clear as mud