Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Your page numbers should run through your WX and exhibits so im concerned its page x of 9.
    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • UK travellers have been turned away at airports because their passports are not valid for EU travel.View the full article
    • i think theres been MORE than amble evidence of that and am astonished that criminal proceedings haven't begun.
    • Yep, those 'requirements' not met to shareholders satisfaction seem to me to be: 1. Not being allowed to increase customer bills by 40% (of which well over 50% of the new total would NOT be investment) 2. 1 plus regulators not agreeing to letting them do 'things in their own time (ie carry on regardless)
  • 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
      • 160 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

Mortgage Shortfall - important new decision


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3935 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

A County Court Judge in Warrington has ruled that the Alliance and Leicester could not succeed in their claim for an £20,000 shortfall from when the property was sold in 2002.

 

His Honour Judge Platts upheld a District Judge’s decision that the bank’s claim was an abuse of process and should be dismissed.

 

Back in 2001 the Court gave Alliance & Leicester a possession order and a judgment for the amounts due under the mortgage. The bank sold the property in 2002, but the sale did not raise sufficient funds to repay the mortgage in full, leaving a £20,000 shortfall.

 

Earlier this year, the bank brought a county court claim for the balance.

 

At a hearing in August, the District Judge threw out the bank's claim. The bank appealed.

 

Dismissing the bank’s request for permission to appeal, Judge Platts said that it was an abuse of process for the bank to bring a claim now when it already held a judgment for the mortgage debt.

 

“This decision will affect many cases all over the country” explained Nick Davis of Albinson Napier & Co, solicitor for Mrs Reynolds. “Banks often wait for many years before suing for a shortfall. Not all lenders asked for judgments when they obtained a possession order, but those who did will find that they cannot now bring a new court claim for any shortfall following sale of the property.”

 

The problem the banks face is that many of the original judgments are more than six years old, and therefore are very difficult to enforce.

 

 

 

Case details:

 

Alliance & Leicester Plc v Reynolds

 

Warrington County Court 14 November 2008.

 

 

 

Edited by citizenB
removed email address
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Sorry, just a question for the legal buffs. In a scenario where a house is repossessed 2 years ago and judgment is awarded the same time as repossession, does that mean that a DCA acting on behalf of a lender has no further legal recourse to chase the debt ie Threaten court action etc. These are my own circumstances and the letter received today gives 14 days to repay the debt. they go on to threaten legal action if no reasonable settlement proposals are forthcoming. This is a "real" debt and I intend to pay it, although I disagree with the figure they are stating. It would be nice to know if I can use this decision to my advantage

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion the lender can't start new court action for the outstanding sums. What it can do is commence enforcement proceedings for the judgment it has already obtained.

 

As to the figures, the judgment crystallised the amount due at the date of the judgment.

 

This will make a difference because the effect of County Courts (Interest on Judgment Debts) Order 1991 :

1. rate of interest will be simple interest at 8%

2. payments come off capital first.

 

so amount due is:

amount of judgment debt

PLUS interest at 8% from judgment until sale

LESS net proceeds of sale

PLUS interest on (judgment debt less net proceeds) from date of sale to now at 8%

 

 

Hope this helps.

Nick

 

Sorry, just a question for the legal buffs. In a scenario where a house is repossessed 2 years ago and judgment is awarded the same time as repossession, does that mean that a DCA acting on behalf of a lender has no further legal recourse to chase the debt ie Threaten court action etc. These are my own circumstances and the letter received today gives 14 days to repay the debt. they go on to threaten legal action if no reasonable settlement proposals are forthcoming. This is a "real" debt and I intend to pay it, although I disagree with the figure they are stating. It would be nice to know if I can use this decision to my advantage
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This will make a difference because the effect of County Courts (Interest on Judgment Debts) Order 1991 :

1. rate of interest will be simple interest at 8%

2. payments come off capital first.

 

so amount due is:

amount of judgment debt

PLUS interest at 8% from judgment until sale

LESS net proceeds of sale

PLUS interest on (judgment debt less net proceeds) from date of sale to now at 8%

 

Hi Nick,

 

just a question on the above. I thought it was up to the lenders how they applied the net proceeds of sale. In my mates case they state that it was applied to the interest first and then the capital.

 

Jody

Jody123

Please note I have no legal training - the information I have has been gleaned from too many hours on this site! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If there was a Judgment then my view is that this crystallises the debt and the statutory provisions apply, so the lender cannot apply to interest first.

 

Hi Nick,

 

just a question on the above. I thought it was up to the lenders how they applied the net proceeds of sale. In my mates case they state that it was applied to the interest first and then the capital.

 

Jody

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
  • 3 years later...

[ATTACH=CONFIG]44529[/ATTACH]

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for finding the transcript citizenb. :-)

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3935 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...