finding faulty cca agreements after a ccj??

[reggie76]

Anyone got any feedback to post 92.

 

r&b click on the red triangle if you don't get any help!

[42man]

I know one cagger has used section 32c of the limitation act as it quotes a 'mistake' the example I saw was that the cagger had a CCJ and took it for a set aside as the sum claimed was made up in the most part of excessive penalty charges that the OFT ruled on in 2006.....i'm unsure of using with any confidence myself apart from that though....

[42man]

i'd suggest it would only be part of the defence though if you used it....

[reggie76]

I know one cagger has used section 32c of the limitation act as it quotes a 'mistake' the example I saw was that the cagger had a CCJ and took it for a set aside as the sum claimed was made up in the most part of excessive penalty charges that the OFT ruled on in 2006.....i'm unsure of using with any confidence myself apart from that though....

 

Do you know the thread mate?

[r&b]

thanks 42man...the trickiness comes with what constitutes a 'mistake' i suppose, im trying to get as much of an argument for the timing issue ...do u have a link for that instance out of interest?

added..yes i take ur point

[reggie76]

r&b have you seen the post on this link? http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/191353-what-if-judge-asks.html

[r&b]

hi reggie, yes one of those is sitting in the armoury just in case, along with the 000s of other words gleaned mainly from this site and the hugely knowledgeable clientele therein (oops sorry...slipping into my defence again), thanks for the input appreciate it.

[reggie76]

Good luck again for tomorrow

[Spamalot]

Hi R&B,

Just wishing good luck to you and your family tomorrow. Hope all goes well and I shall wait with baited breath for the result, as when I have received all the info I've requested, I suspect I shall be treading the same path as you with a very similar defence. I also hope to be able to use the case of R&B V HFC in my legislation notes. LOL

[r&b]

Reggie,Spam, how very kind of you we very much appreciate your thoughts. Spam, i hope regardless of the result that you will find some useful snippets here. but lets face it if u look hard enough on this site u could almost defend ministerial expenses couldn't you !!!!! lol ...ill post the outcome late tom pm i expect..thanks again

[reggie76]

Morning r&b, how you feeling today?

[r&b]

Hi all, back from hearings so I thought Id let u know how it all went. both other sides used the same agency solicitor, very affable chap, thought he was lulling me into false sense of security, but he wasnt. tried to get a few bits out of me without being pushy but i fended them off fairly easily. went in and sat down to an immediate right mr r&b off u go from the judge..."which case sir?", "both" came the reply..oh great start i thought..took me a bit to get my paperwork out (6000 words for each and multiple sheets of back-up) by which time he launched into "when were these cases first judged?" bugger i thought, timeliness as suspected the major stumbling block. mr affable obviously had the dates to hand with his half dozen pages (note to self and others, have bullet points on 1 or 2 sheets and refer to other docs otherwise u get lost). immediately the judge informed me that "the time taken would preclude him from finding in my favour"...(hhmmm thats half of my bundle down the drain before i start ).."unless i had a very good chance of a successful defence." excellent, back onside then. off i go into the CCA unenforceable blah blah...(we are now dealing with the mint version but they are essentially the same) he couldnt see anything wrong with it ??? and didnt i have my copy from 2001? err no actually!!! i went on to explain the missing prescribed terms etc, he thought it fine that everything was on 2 separate sheets until i 'proved' that the terms were from a diff era (tks to supa for spotting that).many tos and fros of why doesnt it conform, what are these prescribed terms etc etc. then i think he saw i had actually answered a few of his quick fire questions, which had put me on the back foot a bit if im honest, so he turned to the conspicuously quiet other side. "mr r&b says it not enforceable, u tell me why it is"...ouch.. and a bit of elmer fudd to follow from the affable chap (i think this judge was having fun watching us squirm actually), which basically ended in bypassing the issue as "i only have a poor copy in front of me sir" (shame) and reiterating the timeliness of the application again. after more explanations from myself about the prescribed terms and needing to be in correct format, all in the four corners, CCAA 1974 this n that blah blah..the judge said that he was not going to read through the entire CCA now, so he thought i should put in a fully particularised draft defence and the other side should give a fully particularised draft reply to that defence, for both cases. I consider that a result really as they now surely have no other paperwork to rely on or they wud have used it. their very pleasant solicitor said to me afterwards, that he was under instruction to push the timeliness aspect and go for compliance under reg 3 Consumer Credit (canc notices n copies of docs) regs 1983 and put the onus on me to produce a defective CA as im the applicant? he didnt need to use them as it turned out. so not out of the woods but at least it wasnt thrown out. and he is taking the CPR 13.3, of seeing if i have a valid defence seriously, which kinda takes out my achilles of timeliness...i hope. so next step is the defences (got 21 days they have 42days) which i ll be onto in next few days, with help from u guys. and a sincere thanks for the help so far.

[pussycatdoll]

Congratulations R&B it sounds like the DJ agreed partially with your reasoning and the other side werent fully prepped.

 

I am surprised that he didnt order a set aside though.

 

I wouldnt have thought that was an normal procedure basically allowing the creditor to continue the case that they had already won:???:

 

And allowing you to defend it.

 

Last time I went to court for a set aside it was against a Double glazing firm who broke a verbal agreement. I said didnt receive court papers. DJ said to the other side anything to say - they babbled on for two minutes until I interjected and pointed out that it was a hearing for set aside. Judge agreed said set aside and within 5 mins we walked out of court.

[questioning]

Excellent R & B,

Just shows what you can accomplish if you try. You deserve that result as you have really tried to help yourself.

I must admit I thought the fact that you had admitted the debt was going to be the major problem. Although I hoped that it would not be the case this along with the time issue was where I thought the judge would say "no way, Mr. r & b."

So now you have to draft a defence to show the judge you do have a valid defence.

Strange way of doing things but I don't know anything about set asides,

I must admit I can see the logic in the judges decision, It makes it quite easy for him to read your def. and come to a decision, which with a sound defence I think it will result in the set asides in your favour.

 

Good one mate you've worked hard and done well.

[reggie76]

Well done r&b. Do you want to drop me a pm and perhaps we can help each other as I'm going for a set aside and preparing my defence

[r&b]

thats great PCD nice story, we all love the winners and i hope u dont have to keep going down these routes. In all honesty after about 2 mins i thought all was lost as i was getting such a hard time from the DJ, til he gave the other guy equal measure..so im quite happy to be able to put a defence in, as i dont think they can effectively answer it. no chicken counting yet tho, im still firmly in the 'MAY' set aside camp. I dont know if yours was affected by this, but a warning to others on this site (as flagged by pretty much everyone with experience and knowledge i have to say),the the promptness issue was at the forefront, i tried to get some reasoning in, but it was immediately dismissed: taking poor advice from CCCS to the admission of the original debt, for example was dismissed by, "so u took advice and acted on it." , end of. i wasted a lot of time and effort on preparations trying to defend that, which would have been better served on other aspects, in that wonderful luxury of 20x20 hindsight. i have had more pleasant experiences but its a steep learning curve with this stuff and "what dont kill ya learns ya" or smth like that anyway.

[r&b]

Q,sorry u were posting while i was writing, thank you, you have been a real help. yes as i said i think thats a result really thats all i wanted was to able to put a defence in against their rubbish and he has given me the chance. im quietly confident but always those nagging doubts as its one mans view at the end of the day...u will be on my list of helpers tho if thats ok...subject to u having enough decent coffee of course...

[r&b]

reggie thanks, if i can help in any way i will.

[r&b]

Excellent R & B,

Strange way of doing things but I don't know anything about set asides,

I must admit I can see the logic in the judges decision, It makes it quite easy for him to read your def. and come to a decision, which with a sound defence I think it will result in the set asides in your favour.

 

Q, yes i think thats what he was saying that he couldnt possibly go through the CCA at the hearing so wanted to see exactly what points i was making and they were defending. it does as u say almost bypass the admission and time issue which is as good as i could hope for i think...more work required then..lol

[questioning]

With a well thought out defence making all the points water tight I really think you have a blerdy good chance. Are you going to start a new thread for your defences and link to this one or continue here.?

If you start a new one put a link to it at the end of this thread.

I think you should give your self a pat on the back, U have done well.

Unfortunately another poster got a "No WAY, judgment stands" at her set aside hearing yesterday, so give yourself a pat on the back.

[pussycatdoll]

I dont know if this might help or not - one of the angles I was going to attack on is that without the original CCA and t's and c's we have only their word that the interest rate charged has been correct and that post judgement interest can or cannot be added.

 

This is only possible by production of the original agreement.

 

PCD

[r&b]

Q, sorry to hear abt the the other cagger losing out ...i think ill leave all on here for continuity,..ive now got 3 defences to produce lol nth by halves eh.... PCD, i think ive got one of them on the rack as they r stating an appl form as a CA (it says both on the form) and it may have been from ur thread but that was going to be one of my arguments so thanks for that. but with this one i have no agreement at all. the other side was intimating that they will push the onus on me to produce a faulty credit agreement. im wondering if i have time to enforce the 31.16 in court? they havent been able to produce any copies and have admitted so(albeit on 'without prejudice' letter). ive got 21 days to put in full draft defence but i think i can amend it if new docs turn up? i could do with some advice on this as it seems fairly individual.

is this confusing, me stating the 2 cases on same thread?

[Spamalot]

Well done so far R&B...keep the faith

[r&b]

any ideas on whether i should/have time to go for enforcement of 31.16 request made previously or should i defend on no agreement at all barring an unsigned, executed agreement..(this is the letter that they will most likely defend on -if solicitor was telling truth- came with couple statements and an 'executed agreement' blank, no sigs or anth else)

src="http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt231/robntanya/HFCnoagreementletter.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket">

Edited April 9, 2009 by r&b
changed image

[r&b]

any views on the above pls?