Repo order help with defence needed.

[Lord_Alcohol]

Well......I lost, basically the judge said the default notice was more than adequate as it carried the title 'default notice' so it was clear what it meant.

 

He asked me if I owed the money and I said yes prior to the claimant unlawfully terminating the agreement. He then said could I pay the balance I said no, he then ordered a judgement against me for immediate repo of the vehicle.

 

I did all my homework, quoted for the CCA but he didnt care.

 

Beware anyone who is depending on a dodgy DN as it clearly doesnt matter.

 

Appeal ? Probably not, at the moment I am just sick to death of it all.

 

I am now waiting for all the posters to say I must have done something wrong, I wonder how many of them have actually sat in front of the judge?????

 

Cosalt

 

Cosalt - this is appalling, I am truly sorry.

 

I think we need the expert CAGgers to look at this and see what's gone wrong.

 

Clearly a judge can dismiss s88 as irrelevant - perhaps, for others, the key is to never admit you owe the sum demanded because that only becomes due when the DN is properly compliant (ie, s87(1)(b))?

 

Alternatively, it has to be s140 (unfair relationships)...

 

We need Vint, pt and others to look at this if they can.

 

Cosalt, you know you have 14 days before the judgement is registered?

 

LA

[Capricorn1601]

subbing

[Capricorn1601]

afternoon guest.

[cymruambyth]

 

I am now waiting for all the posters to say I must have done something wrong, I wonder how many of them have actually sat in front of the judge?????

 

Cosalt

 

I don't think anyone will say this as there have been some weird and wonderful decisions due the DJ lottery and ignorance. When a DJ doesn't know something they will side with a lawyer as they obviously know more than a LiP and must be telling the truth!!!!!!!

Edited May 24, 2010 by cymruambyth

[brooooooooooce]

sub

[Lord_Alcohol]

I don't think anyone will say this as there have been some wierd and wonderful decisions due the DJ lottery and ignorance. When a DJ doesn't know something they will side with a lawyer as they obviously know more than a LiP and must be telling the truth!!!!!!!

 

I agree.

 

Cosalt, you've done nothing wrong as far as I can see. The law is clear, it was not followed, yet the creditor's mistake has been overlooked.

 

LA

[NewToTheFight]

Did this fail because the debt was admitted?

Maybe it would have been best to deny the debt because the DN was invalid the contract therefore did not endure

 

Is an appeal appropriate?

[frettful38]

I am not too sure but there was a cagger worsteve who I believe got his debt quashed as he too had a faulty DN, maybe he could pop in and advise.

 

cosalt, please do not despair, I know its easier said than done, any court appearance can make anyones knees bolt, trust me I am speaking from experience having attended nearly six hearing since last year on my own problem.

 

My advice is hang in there, there is more than one way to skin a cat, and once one of the experts pop in then fingers crossed something good will come out of this.

 

put in down to experience, just because you've fallen don't mean you can't get back up, chin up and keep strong and keep the fight up:D

[frettful38]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/196312-invalid-default-notices-132.html

 

here is the link where I read about worsteve

[littlefatbudha]

Im so sorry cosalt, it went the same way as mine.lfb

[colin21958]

What was the Judge's response to the fact that they had obviously doctored the copy of the DN they provided?

[exasperated]

Cosalt,

The exact same thing happened to me on a charging order hearing. The first words out of the judges mouth was 'do you owe this money' to which I replied yes and he granted them the charging order. Having been advised since then it was this simple mistake what lets the judge have a n easy ride and rule in favourof your opponents.

Apparently the answer should have been 'well judge thats what we are here to find out out' This then forces these sometimes ignorant dj's to listen to both sides of the arguement

[Lord_Alcohol]

What was the Judge's response to the fact that they had obviously doctored the copy of the DN they provided?

 

Can you now sue the creditor for obtaining a judgement through deception?

 

Or request court to set aside the judgement on the basis of fabricated evidence?

Edited May 24, 2010 by Lord_Alcohol
Head stuck in the cupboard

[Desperate Daniella]

I'm so sorry, Cosalt.

[colin21958]

Can you now sue the creditor for obtaining a judgement through deception?

 

Or request court to set aside the judgement on the basis of fabricated evidence?

 

I would have thought so, that was why I wondered what the judge said about this point when it was raised...

[Worsteve]

Hi Cosalt

 

That was utter b@llocks. I am very sorry to hear that the System chose to ignore the law again. I recently won my case with RBS on a dodgy DN. My first day in court the judge asked me 'Mr xxxxx you borrowed the money, You must pay it back!'' I responded with " In all due respects your honour, I am aware of how the Fractional Reserve banking system works'. He then told me to get out of court and chat with the oppositions solicitor and that I was not to come back in unless I had previous Case Law which showed where a Dodgy DN was won. I had that. My DN was missing prescribed text and the dates did not allow enough time to remedy.

 

The truth is....we don't 'Borrow' the money. Our signature creates it! If anybody has any doubts about this then there are other websites that teach about it. I do know that the judge was not happy at me telling him I knew the truth behind all the banking lies.

 

So, So sorry Cosalt. I know what it is like sitting in front of the judge. You did what was right, the DJ broke the law in my opinion. I don't have the experience to guide you on what to do next. Others have the experience here. Whatever, Stay the course, know you are telling the truth, have a beer and lick your wounds, but get back on the horse and see what the next course of action these wonderful people on here can come up with. Best of Luck.

Edited May 24, 2010 by Worsteve

[cymruambyth]

Did this fail because the debt was admitted?

Maybe it would have been best to deny the debt because the DN was invalid the contract therefore did not endure

 

Is an appeal appropriate?

 

It can be admitted that there was a debt but that it is not legally binding because it is not properly executed.

[Lord_Alcohol]

If it were me (and I know it isn't) I would nip down to the court and grab an N244 form and set out why you feel the judgement is wrong. You can mention that s87(1)(b) is unavailable to the creditor because s88 was not observed, and you can also add the clear fact of doctored evidence.

 

You can request that the judgement is not enforced until the new hearing.

 

There's not much to lose at this stage, other than the fee (not sure how much it is as I think it varies depending on type of hearing).

 

Worth a shot?

 

LA

 

PS: Frett above is right - nil deperandum

[NewToTheFight]

Not legally binding or not legally enforceable?

[Guest]

worsteve.

 

Hi Cosalt

 

That was utter b@llocks that. I am very sorry to hear that the System chose to ignore the law again. I recently won my case with RBS on a dodgy DN. My first day in court the judge asked me 'Mr xxxxx you borrowed the money, You must pay it back!'' I responded with " In all due respects your honour, I am aware of how the Fractional Reserve banking system works'. He then told me to get out of court and chat with the oppositions solicitor and that I was not to come back in unless I had previous Case Law which showed where a Dodgy DN was won. I had that. worsteve, which case law did you use? thanks. My DN was missing prescribed text and the dates did not allow enough time to remedy.

 

......

 

[Worsteve]

Hi Ford

 

I used the Woodchester Lease v swain case study.

 

My thread is here with the defence statement;

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/247688-default-notices-court-dates-5.html#post2845732

[Guest]

Hi Ford

 

I used the Woodchester Lease v swain case study.

 

My thread is here with the defence statement;

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/247688-default-notices-court-dates-5.html#post2845732

 

hi, thanks. (thought maybe you had another authoritative case in favour!)

[middenmess]

You have nothing to reproach yourself for--t takes guts and determination to represent yourself in court-- it's just an unfortunate fact of life that many Judges pay scant regard to the law as laid down by Parliament but tend to pre judge us plebs as riff raff who need to be kept firmly down and in our place.

 

The law is firm regarding an invalid default notice and there is no room for manoeuvre at all.

 

Any deviance by the judge away from what is enshrined in law must make the judgement completely wrong and reversible upon appeal.

 

The Judge you had today was a buffoon.

[MARTIN3030]

I wiull merge the threads so peeps can get some background.

[Bigdebtor]

It can be admitted that there was a debt but that it is not legally binding because it is not properly executed.

 

Cosalt

 

So sorry to hear - obviously a gross miscarriage of justice - but it seems that Justice and The Law don't co-exist!

 

As a trained scientist (but no lawyer) my instinct is always to rely on figures and logic - which don't lie and cannot be distorted by weasel words.

 

The question "do you owe this money?" seems to be asked often. My instinct would be to prepare for this question by going through every statement and work out exactly how much I have "borrowed" (X) and how much I have "repaid" (Y). That means, in the absence of any enforceable agreement regarding interest. charges etc. I could answwer I have repaid anything I borrowed - provided Y exceeds X (unless they can produce an enforceable agreement to recover interest and charges) and they in fact owe me Y-X.

 

Another answer could be genuinely "I don't know - that's why I asked for the copies of the CCA, DN etc. presented here. Can you tell me please? "

 

My logic suggests the whole point of the judge is to tell YOU who owes who what. You state the facts as to what was borrowed and what has been repaid. He sees the "agreement" and the "dodgy DN" etc. and should then work out who owes whom what. Where's the problem - it's not rocket science! :?

 

However my lawyer son keeps telling me that science and logic have no place in THE LAW.

 

Science only keeps us sheltered, heated, fed, safe, alive while travelling 30,000 feet up in the air (and when we come back down), able to travel to and from the moon, relatively free from disease, surviving with transplanted organs etc. All of that is clearly nothing compared to The Law which decides on our freedom or otherwise!

 

Come to think of it - why are we surprised at Cosolt's loss today!!!

 

Up the Revolution!

 

BD

 

PS - Seriously though Cosalt - There MUST be some grounds for appeal - or am I being too logical again?

Edited May 24, 2010 by Bigdebtor
Typos (too mad to type accurately!).