Documents in Court - Civil Evidence Act 1995

[reggie76]

Subbing

[basa48]

We need a copy of the revised Code of Practice for Legal Admissibility of Information Stored on Electronic Document Management Systems, BIP 0008:2004 (previously PD 0008 ) issued by the British Standards Institution (BSI).

 

This Code of Practice provides guidelines to ensure, as far as possible, that electronic documents and scanned images will be accepted as evidence by the courts. The basis of the guidelines are that process under which documents are managed are as important as the technology used, for example where a document is printed, it should accurately reproduce the contents of the "original". The Civil Evidence Act (1995) introduces a flexible system whereby all documents and copy documents, including computer records, can be admitted as evidence in civil proceedings. A judge will still have to be persuaded to treat that evidence as reliable, therefore organisations will have to prove the authenticity and reliability of the record.

 

The key principles behind BIP 0008 are:

• Authenticity – Processes to be followed at system planning, implementation and the procedures by which the systems should be operated.
  
  
• Storage and access procedures – Procedures including scanning, indexing, retrieval, system administration, archiving, off-site storage and training, to be followed.
  
  
• Demonstrability of adherence – A structured audit process resulting in a Certificate of Conformity that displays demonstrability of adherence.
  
  

[Docman]

You can purchase the full standard from BSI but it costs £55. The link is BIP 0008-1:2004.

 

If all you want is to know how it fits in with pracice, I have used summaries from other organisations, for example Document Management, Document Imaging, Document Scanning | Archival

[cas93]

subbing

[andrewdm]

OMG if one was to take court actions as I have asked for copies of agrrements but none have come.. what is what I write when taking them to court? They have also tacitly agreed to pay me a sum of money for writing to me knowing full well that what they are doing is fraud. So another issue is payment.

[summerbreeze]

This is a great thead

I am in court in a few weeks and the claimant has destroyed the original agreement and just has microfiche copies that are fully legible .

Do I write to their solicitors and ask for details of the scanning and storage systems or do I put it into my witness statement.

 

Can anyone suggest a way of asking the questions I need to ask. I need to sound as if I know what I am talking about even though I am not very technically minded ... and a little old granny too !

[summerbreeze]

This is a great thead

I am in court in a few weeks and the claimant has destroyed the original agreement and just has microfiche copies that are fully legible .

Do I write to their solicitors and ask for details of the scanning and storage systems or do I put it into my witness statement.

 

Can anyone suggest a way of asking the questions I need to ask. I need to sound as if I know what I am talking about even though I am not very technically minded ... and a little old granny too !

 

Hmmm been reading more ... my agreement is post 2007 ..am I just beating my head against a brick wall ?

[alanalana]

Hmmm been reading more ... my agreement is post 2007 ..am I just beating my head against a brick wall ?

 

I will have to suggest you start a thread in the debt forum to seek assistance on this one. I found the CEA 1995 but you would be bettet to seek advice from someone more with a legal perspective on this.

 

aa

[Brigadier 1JCS]

Can anyone enlighten me on the validity of 'reconstructed agreements'

which just have the creditors name & address ant debtors no signatures or dates, and consists a title page with the usual CCA 1974 heading and the rest is 10 pages of T & C's.

Is a district judge bound to accept this as proof of the debt?

[count orlok]

He shouldn't do, anybody with a computer and printer (or even an old typewriter) could knock up a document saying someone else owed them X amount of money. The reconstructed agreement is (or should be) in order to satify a CCA 74 request.

[Docman]

Can anyone enlighten me on the validity of 'reconstructed agreements'

which just have the creditors name & address ant debtors no signatures or dates, and consists a title page with the usual CCA 1974 heading and the rest is 10 pages of T & C's.

Is a district judge bound to accept this as proof of the debt?

 

Brigadier

Have a look at the thread (longish I know) about Dissecting the Manchester cases.

Essentially, the Manchester cases (sometimes referred to as Carey v HSBC after the first cases in the list) deal with what documents are required to satisfy a formal request from a debtor under Ss77 or 78 of the Consumer Credit ACT 1974 for a copy of his credit agreement. The judge ruled that reconstructed documents where permissible under these circumstances because the sections where designed to provide information. But remember, these where all cases where the debtor was the claimant and thus had to prove their case. The banks were defending and really had nothing to do.

When the shoe is on the other foot, the bank is the claimant, it is for the bank to prove the existence of a credit agreement that complies with the statute (in particular S61 of the CCA) and case law (Wilson v DTI etc). A District Judge has no option but to reject a claim if the agreement is not signed and containing the prescribed terms at the point of signature. Unfortunately, it is becoming apparent through this site that a number of banks are pursuing claims n the basis of 'reconstructed' agreements. IMO this can only be in the hope that they are not challenged by defendants who are 'Litigants in Person' and therefore not familiar with the law and more worryingly by District Judges who should know the law but plainly do not have the knowledge.