What is the Rankin judgement?

[count orlok]

I saw the watchdog episode about these people using the CCA74 to get out of a few debts, and understood it all went wrong, but never found out what happened. can anybody explian?

 

cheers

[cerberusalert]

Have a read through http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/147432-high-court-judgement-rankines.html

[count orlok]

thankyou

[robinredbreast]

Hi there,

 

I've heard about this (on site), but never knew what it meant.

 

So have read through the Rankines info, and I'm now more confused and frightened then ever now.

 

I'm no legal bod, so don't really understand a lot of the legal stuff in there, but from what I think I understand .....

 

Did they get into trouble with the Judge because they brought the actions against their creditors (minus Tesco), even though these creditors were not trying to enforce the debts anyway?

 

If so, why on earth did they take them to court, was it to make the court tell the creditors they had no chance of collecting or what? This is the bit I don't understand.

 

Also, why was this is a High Court - this is whats scarring me, I have M&S debts x 2, for which they have sent application forms (that have no prescribed terms or reference to them in the docs).

 

They total about 12k, so I'm now terrified I'm going end up in High Court if they persue these with vigor due to combined amount? Because I think I would simply faint with fright if thats where I had to appear. So I would just try and get £ from absolutely anywhere to pay them to stop this happening.

 

If someone could explain this (and about how I may end up in the High Court) in a little bit of laymans terms, I would be really, really greatful.

[cerberusalert]

The Rankines took the banks to court, not the otherway around. Have a read of the judgement on this pdf file http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/84285-ccas-dave-against-world-38.html#post1554322 it will help you understand how they got up the judges nose.

[robinredbreast]

Hi there,

 

That is what I thought had happened ... so my understanding is they appeared in the High Court, because that is where they wanted the hearings held (?), and ordinarilly if a creditor does take you to court, the matter would be a heard in a "normal civil" one.

 

Having re-read the PDF again, from what I can understand, weren't they so silly to have done this - I wondered what exactly they wanted to gain, when they were not being persued by the creditors in question anyway.... makes my mind boggle !!!

 

So glad this thread was started, because I've been wondering for ages what peps were talking about when they were discussing the "rankine judgement", and this has helped me to find out about it.

 

Thank you.