Muffintop v mbna

[underdog13]

If they ask for the cards again, tell them you have already disposed of them, so cannot return them to MBNA;)

[cosalt]

Agreed, don't whatever you do send the cards back, even cut up !

 

A cut up card has come back to bite someone recently.

 

And look out for someone from MBNA rumaging through your bin sacks !!!

[Muffintop]

hya, one of my cards is actually cut in half as i wanted to make sure a long time ago I didnt use it. how could it cause a problem if I have not got the card or have cut it up? (i can see why I shouldnt return it, or produce it to a judge, but surely I could say I havent used it for a long while or had cut if up??? dont really understand this one, as the issue is the enforceability of the agreement to which tye dont seem in my eyes to be producing.

[Muffintop]

http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t42/davey77_2007/AmexBurn.jpg

 

lol...

[underdog13]

MBNA recently won a case that they had produced no agreement for whatsoever, upon production of the cut up credit card:eek:

 

The poor man (Alf with hair's friend) died a few weeks later:(

[sunflower99]

MBNA recently won a case that they had produced no agreement for whatsoever, upon production of the cut up credit card:eek:

 

The poor man (Alf with hair's friend) died a few weeks later:(

Yes i saw that thread.It was disgusting and the judge could not have known the law properly and hopefully if the poor man had not been on his deathbed and able to appeal against it the case would have been thrown out and the MBNA vultures made to look stupid and heartless.I suppse they iknew that they could get away with dragging a dying man into court who was not able to and not had the time left to put up a fight against these vultures.

[sunflower99]

Hi Muffintop!

Gaz had a unique solution to his problem of disposing of credtit cards! He microwaved them!:Di thought that a very good idea!

[sunflower99]

Agreed, don't whatever you do send the cards back, even cut up !

 

A cut up card has come back to bite someone recently.

 

And look out for someone from MBNA rumaging through your bin sacks !!!

LOL! Yes i expect MBNA would love to do that!

[sunflower99]

Hi M

exactly the same as mine unenforceable unless they can prove the prescribed terms are on the back, as they only have microfiche how are they going to prove otherwise. And their DN is rubbish i cant see paragraph 8.

 

Most of their letters are just trying to scare you into paying, if and when they do something about it, their are people on here that will guide you through it.

 

Please try not to worry, i know you wont listen but try. And by the way i had that letter about a month ago!

 

GG

Hi GG and MT

My mbna alleged is also like that and they have sent a page of terms and conditions which they artfully imply is on back by photographing images on back and front of a page.I have recently written to them to ask them to confirm that they are on same page and if they do to make an appointment for me to view my alleged agreement at chester!:DI am just waiting for an invite now! A nice irish man from MBNA left a message on my answer machine a few days after they should have got this letter saying he urgently wanted to speak to me that day! He said his office was open until 9pm but he said that he would rather i phoned him sooner rather than later!:eek:Needless to say i did not phone him up as i have written to them and told them verbally countless number of times that i only communicate in writing,However on reflection i am now wondering if i should have phoned him! as he was probably ringing me to arrange a trip to chester Towers to inspect my alleged MBNA agreement!It would maybe have been quite fun to ring him back and tell him i was assuming that was what his call was about!

Muffintop also another thing that made me feel a bit better when trawling through MBNA threads was that i think i can recall someone in same boat as you me and GG who actually managed to see a copy of his true agreement i think and saw that there were no terms on back of his at all just an advertisment for, MBNA fiancial products or something and in his case like us MBNA had been trying to imply there was some terms on back.

[guzzleguts]

Hi M & Sunflower

 

Sunflower I have read that thread too, just proves what lengths they are prepared to go to rip us off.

 

I have also asked to see my agreement, maybe when they agree we could all ask for the same date and hire a coach to Chester for the day. (really)

 

GG

[underdog13]

Save me a seat:D

[sunflower99]

Hi M & Sunflower

 

Sunflower I have read that thread too, just proves what lengths they are prepared to go to rip us off.

 

I have also asked to see my agreement, maybe when they agree we could all ask for the same date and hire a coach to Chester for the day. (really)

 

GG

Yes GG thats a great idea! :DPerhaps i ought to ring that nice MBNA irishman to arrange a date for us all to come over to Chester Towers to view our alledged agrreements Anyone want to join me guzzleguts and underdog for a nice trip to Chester Towers!

[Muffintop]

Cleared this post as my husband had typed it by mistake. thought he was in his thread.

Edited March 8, 2009 by Muffintop

[guzzleguts]

And dont forget the MBNA Irishmen dont have a credit licence to collect debt in England, thats why you always get the chester number to ring them back.

 

GG

[Muffintop]

In a bit of a whirling divish.. sort of spinning top thingy.. what is section 142 of cca 1974.... on another thread someone very experienced pt i think has suggested that just ceasing payments after your cca request and no agreement sent (12 plus 2 days) and you go on to send the this account is in dispute you may no blah blah blah this is a dodgy move and you should maybe have incuded s142 of cca 74 in the letter..... what does this mean? can I rectify it, should I rectify it.

[Terrier7]

I've just posted a thread "Full Scale Attack DCA's", I'm in the process of to pursuing DCA's etc for any money extorted by them in the last 6 years. With special regard to MBNA, do you know of their long term document storage policy's?

T7

[Muffintop]

Not a clue but will check out your thread. Im bumping my s142 query above anyone......you experienced caggers.

[guzzleguts]

Hi M

 

I think s142 is where you take it to court and ask the judge to declare the agreement is not enforceable. But ive have been informed on here that its not a good idea to instigate the above proceedings against the creditor, because the judge may see it as unlawful enrichment. (I think thats right, happy to be corrected).

 

GG

[Terrier7]

Reproduced below is part of another thread which seems to cover the possible circumstances you mention. If it is not legal to enforce something in the first place, then it naturally follows that any monies claimed or paid over are done so illegally and must be returned. I suppose it's a bit like goods or perhaps a car, bought which are already on finance, then passed down through more than one owner. They can be taken off someone 'down the line' if they have passed through more than one owner on the basis that 'good title' cannot be gleaned from bad title initially. (A stoeln painting sold years later - no provenance.

I'm more than happy to find out! I guess what will happen in practice is that they will fight tooth and nail up until the door of the Court, or serious expense, then settle to avoid a Judgement. :-

. ".............The message to be gleaned from sections 65, 106, 113 and 127 of the Consumer Credit Act is that where a court dismisses an application for an enforcement order under section 65 the lender is intended by Parliament to be left without recourse against the borrower in respect of the loan. That being the consequence intended by Parliament, the lender cannot assert at common law that the borrower has been unjustly enriched.

 

 

This interpretation of the Consumer Credit Act accords with the approach adopted by the House in Orakpo v Manson Investments Ltd [1978] AC 95, regarding section 6 of the Moneylenders Act 1927 and, more recently, in Dimond v Lovell [2002] 1 AC 384, another case where section 127(3) precluded the making of an enforcement order. In Dimond's case the restitutionary remedy sought was payment of the hire charge for a replacement car used by Mrs Dimond. The House rejected a claim advanced on the basis of unjust enrichment. Lord Hoffmann observed that Parliament contemplated that a debtor might be enriched consequential upon non-enforcement of an agreement pursuant to the statutory provisions. It was not open to the court to say this consequence is unjust and should be reversed by a remedy at common law: [2002] 1 AC 384, 397-398.

18. Since the judgment of Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead clearly sets out that without a credit agreement the claimant's case cannot succeed

 

[davey77]

Which thread was this on Terrier?

[Muffintop]

that has completely frazzled my brain im afraid,, can you put it in laymans terms pse..

I thought the same as GG but iv posted on another thread and seem to be getting some conflicting messages.Slick ru around as the advise is coming from another site team person.. may try to get them to take a look at my concerns on here.. thanks

 

Oh by the way did you realise.. i did a google search on sec127 to see what it was about and noticed my post on cag re this above had come up on google. scary stuff that you can be tagged so quickly...

[Muffintop]

This was on a thread consumer credit act agreements which got me in a two and eight over this sec 147... read my post below and the response.

I have decided not to go this route. and continue with not paying until they show me my agreement.

Originally Posted by Muffintop

Thanks Peter,

I think this is a case of conflicting opinions and quite dangerous if you dont have a lot of knowledge in the first place apart from what you read via CAG. Of course we at the end of the day all have to make our own decision and we are responsible for them. I understood it that it was a case of 12 plus 2 days... showing that you are doing everything to show your are being reasonable in the period of time you would wait for your cca and if still nothing enforceable received or anything at all then the only way to go would be to stop payments and place account in dispute. I have since realised that the dispute is only your interpretation of dispute and the credit card comp do not see it the same way and this is how they are able to place inadverse material on your credit file (they are pretty much a law unto themselves) they think if they have even sent you current t & c's that means they have fulfilled their responsibilitys on sec 77/78 of cca.... I have also tried to get my Subject Access Request and done a cpr pre court request and had nothing.

I have two cards mbna and bcard that Iv dealt with by stopping payments, a 3rd card with m & s I went through same process but continued to pay, it seems to me I have had more responses by not paying and I would welcome going to court (as long as I dont end up loosing and paying huge costs but under 5k anyway) in order to see my original cca... I am hoping that any dj would see that I have tried my hardest to get them to show me the cca and they have had every opportunity to comply.

 

As far as the credit file goes, I am gutted truly that they have placed entries on my file as I have never in my life missed a payment ever.. this could have an effect on my future, but I was hopin if it were to ever get to court or get finalised with a F & F settlement then i would be able to get my file cleaned up.

 

I have been advised it is not a good idea to take the credit cards to court as it would be up to me to prove enforceability. To clarify are you saying that a sec127 request is me starting court proceedings? if so I dont think I want to go this way as it appears quite dangerous, I would rather now my file messed up wait for them.

Hi

 

I think you mean to prove unenforceability.

 

I think Pt has said before that if you are not sure of your claim it is not a good idea to pursue the 142 route but if you are confident anyway its one of those decision time things again unfortunately.

Personally i would rather get thm in court and have it cut and dried sometimes when they know you are serious they tend to alter their stance particullarily if they have no valid agreement.

But I would not advise you to do tha if you are not confident it may be better to ride it out and see what they do it may be that you will be able to clear any damenge done to your file father down the line.

I really wish that i could say do this this and this and it will all work out but .

Anyway i can only wish you the best of luck

[Terrier7]

Sorry for delay, had to really search, found it! :-

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/122431-me-mbna-abbey-mbna-10.html

Page 10 - no.190

[Terrier7]

Hi Mtop, if you mean laymens terms re my earlier, if something is 'illegal' in the first place then there should be a right of redress. I.e, if someone is using an unlawful method of enforcing a debt, then whatever is paid is not lawful and morally / legally should be re-paid together with compensation for stress / expenses / costs caused.

 

I'm not saying this will be easy, but as my claim will be under 5k, there is very little to lose even if, for some as yet unknown reason, it goes wrong. I've discussed this very carefully with my solicitor and we're going to go for it. If nothing else, it's a bit of fun and the DCA rogues deserve it back in Spades!

We can't find anything to the contrary - unless anyone on here can suggest otherwise... (hopefully not!). It may be that others have just been happy to get their debts cancelled without wanting to risk stirring up a hornets nest or not wanting to be the first to mount a reclaim.

[Terrier7]

Oh Mtop, re threat of adverse credit. I'm out of time as mine is past 6 years default date, but the advice I've received is if anyone threatens to apply a default notice or other adverse credit when in default after a CCA request, then threaten immediately apply for an ex parte interlocutory injunction and they will have to pay the costs. If they are in default then they have no legal basis for registering adverse history. Again, this is 'theoretical' and may need testing, but it sounds fine to me.