why you shouldnt use section 77/78 CCA 1974 if you want the signed agreement

[diddydicky]

I think something is amiss. The CAG forum is changing the link details to the donald duck link.

 

i've copied and pasted into the address bar and it goes to the correct page.

 

i could pm the link if anybody is interested.

 

yes please

[diddydicky]

btw i beleive that PT has not left the forum- simply the Egg thread

[Fingers60]

I think something is amiss. The CAG forum is changing the link details to the donald duck link.

 

i've copied and pasted into the address bar and it goes to the correct page.

 

i could pm the link if anybody is interested.

 

yes please

[diddydicky]

seems then that peterbard is a moderator on this other site (and poseted anti CAG material on credit today - and that whilst posting on this site was alleging on THAT site that he was barred from posting on this site

 

seems strange to me that certain mods on this site were prepared to gag the rest of us in order to support him

 

talk about not knowing which side your bread is buttered!!

[B3rty]

Its a shame as divide and conquer springs to mind however he over at Legal seagulls now

[B3rty]

Paul is posting at another site thats a dog that rhymes with legal which the site team wont allow named.

[the_shadow]

btw i beleive that PT has not left the forum- simply the Egg thread

 

Sorry DD, He's confirmed on the other site that he will not post on here. Also due to the politics between the "Orange" site and this one I doubt he will be welcomed back as he's posting on that site now.

 

S.

[basa48]

What the hell!!!!!!

 

Where has PT's Egg thread gone.

 

Does CAG not realise how many people were looking for the outcome of that case?????????

 

Who the hell has got at who?? This stinks!!!

 

Obviously this post won't wont last unless there is an innocent reason!

[paulwlton]

What the hell!!!!!!

 

Where has PT's Egg thread gone.

 

Does CAG not realise how many people were looking for the outcome of that case?????????

 

Who the hell has got at who?? This stinks!!!

 

Obviously this post won't wont last unless there is an innocent reason!

 

No doubt the outcome will be publicized on CAG.

[pt2537]

doubtful

[paulwlton]

doubtful

 

I take it there's politics involved.

[basa48]

No doubt the outcome will be publicized on CAG.

 

Possibly, but that really isn't the point. There was so much valuable argument and discussion in that thread that should have made it almost sacred.

 

I think it is a sad day for the forum members that someone has manipulated for its total removal. This forum is no longer what I thought it was - it has been 'nobbled' !!

[RobinWayRobinme]

Just read the link to Credit Today. WTF do they think we are. The banks and DCA treat us like idiots and they openly try to discredit this forum. I for one have so much I owe to the forum and PT for me and many others has been invaluable with help and direction.

 

I am not a fool and I know that in a forum like this some of the info given by some may not be totally correct, but it was given in good faith it has given me direction to research my situation and read the legislation and case law and check and re-check before I act. Without the forum fxxk knows what shxt I would be in now.

 

We must stick together to ensure this forum continues to provide a first class knowledge base to people like me. Stuff the rest of them.

 

And Paul, I hope your departure is only temporary and that the knife that has obviously been stuck in your back is safely removed and placed where it is justly deserved.

R

[paulwlton]

Just read the link to Credit Today. WTF do they think we are. The banks and DCA treat us like idiots and they openly try to discredit this forum. I for one have so much I owe to the forum and PT for me and many others has been invaluable with help and direction.

 

I am not a fool and I know that in a forum like this some of the info given by some may not be totally correct, but it was given in good faith it has given me direction to research my situation and read the legislation and case law and check and re-check before I act. Without the forum fxxk knows what shxt I would be in now.

 

We must stick together to ensure this forum continues to provide a first class knowledge base to people like me. Stuff the rest of them.

 

And Paul, I hope your departure is only temporary and that the knife that has obviously been stuck in your back is safely removed and placed where it is justly deserved.

R

 

I'm afraid PT will not be posting on CAG again....major loss to members.

[basa48]

Just read the link to Credit Today. WTF do they think we are. The banks and DCA treat us like idiots and they openly try to discredit this forum. I for one have so much I owe to the forum and PT for me and many others has been invaluable with help and direction.

 

I am not a fool and I know that in a forum like this some of the info given by some may not be totally correct, but it was given in good faith it has given me direction to research my situation and read the legislation and case law and check and re-check before I act. Without the forum fxxk knows what shxt I would be in now.

 

We must stick together to ensure this forum continues to provide a first class knowledge base to people like me. Stuff the rest of them.

 

And Paul, I hope your departure is only temporary and that the knife that has obviously been stuck in your back is safely removed and placed where it is justly deserved.

R

 

I just think forums like CT are not worth the bandwidth except perhaps to see how the contributors twist and turn in response to the whims of creditors. They think up new ways to discredit those who would advise the debtor believing we 'prols' are here to be used, abused and milked to death for the benefit of the rich and powerful. I just bet they HATE the internet where all their lies can be laid bare. You can almost see them in their posts squirming in the embarrassment of their past follies.

[Fingers60]

Yes its a great shame to lose PT at such a crucial time following the kneale vs barclays judgement.

I am having to reverse park out of a very tight space and go back to Barclays with my tail between my legs in the hope they dont award costs against me in my stayed case...for daring to pursue them legally just for a copy of my credit agreement, following 12 months of asking for it politely!

It seems the loopholes are closing , but when loopholes close others will open, sought out by guys like PT....

[RobinWayRobinme]

I do agree basa. The conclusion from this is they obviously consider CAG a major threat to them and this is evidenced by (a) comments on CT and (b) there infiltration of this site to attempt to create doubt in our minds about our arguments and the law. But by far the greatest evidence of CAG's threat to them is the success of people like you and I.

 

Care must be taken that this latest episode does not put CAG into meltdown and that we continue and provide the mutual help to the genuine users from the extensive knowledge and pool of experience we collectively have. I think that the most powerful message we can send to the opposition is that we can take a blow on the chin, but we can get up and fight on. BUSINESS AS USUAL.

R

I just think forums like CT are not worth the bandwidth except perhaps to see how the contributors twist and turn in response to the whims of creditors. They think up new ways to discredit those who would advise the debtor believing we 'prols' are here to be used, abused and milked to death for the benefit of the rich and powerful. I just bet they HATE the internet where all their lies can be laid bare. You can almost see them in their posts squirming in the embarrassment of their past follies.

[B3rty]

Like most forums many posts made in an authoritative manner are by people like my self with limited knowledge its a shame when a forum loses a resource such as Paul who had access to a massive legal database and I think most saw as an authority on legal points

[citizenB]

Couldn't we simply mark them so they are clearly recognisable as being from CAG? We are after all intending to use them as examples ourselves of what the creditor at that time was actually dishing out in order to contest the witness from the bank scenario who states what was sent out was perfect.

 

It is a persuasive tool at best, especially as the court should accept that large institutions use templates by the thousand meaning a hand crafted perfect default notice from the same period that does conveniently comply for example is highly unlikely to be what it suggests.

 

If a DCA troll gets it its of little use to them with the CAG watermark all over it for example. If anything it would be good to let them see our armoury, if they know they can be shown in court to be producing 'true copies' that are clearly not they'd be pretty stupid to risk stating otherwise. Besides, there's no way of safeguarding it anyway so let's just make it work our way.

 

 

I could be totally off base here, but having run this by another site team member, it would appear that a similar idea was thought of way back. However, it would seem that one of the problems there could be would be banks/creditors having access one way or another.

 

Watermarking was a good idea. However, they wouldnt need to produce the document from the data base.. just reconstruct their own nice new shiny copy.... using the information that we have then provided for them in order to "get it right".

 

HTH.

[freethemice]

So instead of fighting why not try and work with the banks to establish what the terms and conditions would have actualy been of the various credit cards.

A standard set agreed by both sides.

This would mean bank reconstituted agreements accurately reflected the terms and conditions actualy in place and then the debtor could truly see what they signed up for when he took out a card.

This would save untold hours of court time.

 

As taxpayers it is us that pay when the banks do not so lets end the war and focus more on putting the system right.

 

Things like saving court time by Creditors providing credit agreements with the court claim.

Actually forcing the banks to keep a copy of a default notice when they register this with a credit reference agency.

[Dotty50]

I think the only debtor that will truly know what they signed up for, is the one that kept their own copy (if supplied) of the agreement and T & C's.

 

It is apparent from reading on here, that many banks destroyed their paperwork, which has resulted in the situation we have now. It was always clear to me, when previously working in the industry, that all original documentation needed to be kept for a stated time, even after settlement.

 

So how can we, or the banks agree on what would have been accurate at the time of signing?

[freethemice]

I think the only debtor that will truly know what they signed up for, is the one that kept their own copy (if supplied) of the agreement and T & C's.

 

It is apparent from reading on here, that many banks destroyed their paperwork, which has resulted in the situation we have now. It was always clear to me, when previously working in the industry, that all original documentation needed to be kept for a stated time, even after settlement.

 

So how can we, or the banks agree on what would have been accurate at the time of signing?

 

Agreed

 

However...

 

The courts are accepting 'reconstituted' agreements and in some cases these are not put together with any care whatsoever. This is clogging up the legal system and proving a real headache to defend against. I am sure the judges are also unsure of what to do with these as well. Until the higher courts rule on these documents it is in our interest to gather as many agreements as we can and make them available to compare against what the bank states.

I do not see why the banks should be treated as the enemy and denied access to these agreements. If you applied for a mastercard at 17.9% and that is what you got then where is the argument?

[Dotty50]

Banks become the enemy when they hike the interest rates making it much more difficult to ever clear your debts.

 

MBNA hiked mine to 34.9%, on an account that was always paid on time and been paid in full many times!

 

It's Greed on a major scale, IMHO and that is why we are fighting back.

 

It is a concern though, if reconstituted agreements are being accepted, then we are all stuffed anyway and await our turn in court!

[diddydicky]

well i have a statement from a lovely lady at MBNa stating that NO instances have ever been reported to them of pt's not being on agreements or of the laflets containing the t & c's not being sent with the agreement

 

MBNA seem to think that they can b*llsh*t all defendants and that some of us don't talk to each other!!

 

so now i am looking for , say 10 caggers who are willing to pm me the details of any dispute or report they have made to mbna in respect of the above- or, better still any court cases in which they have complained that the PTs were not contained in the agreement or that a leaflet containing the T & C's were not included with any agreement sent to them

 

 

you would need to be willing to sign a witness statement to that effect

 

this will help in my case - but also help other caggers as they will then find it hard to make such sweeping statements in other cases

[exchange]

DD, I would help, but some time ago a cagger known as 'mauricetura' tried something similar to gain support for a case and I met him and signed a witness statement for him. End result was he got banned from CAG as it was deemed too risky for caggers to give up their personal info to an unknown person. He ended up abandoning his battle. Just so you know!