Unenforceability Cases on hold until further notice

[Ruprecht]

You can't expect the media who get most of their income from adverts from the banks to publish the truth and wipe out their best customer.

 

That together with the fact most newspapers are losing money at the moment and probably need huge loans from the banks!

 

The best course of action is to take anything spewed forth from the murdoch machine or money websites, put it in the bog and flush!

 

I wonder if a case involving a default on an unenforceable agreement would ever make it that far anyway? The banks would probably cave in if they knew you were intending to take it all the way.

 

It comes down to the strongest and most clued up people getting their way (debts written off). The weakest who need the most protecting being put off by the media and fed upon by the machine. Business as usual.

[angry cat]

Daniella Lipszyc:

"She also came out in defence of borrowers: 'This is manifestly unfair. Lenders can admit that they don't have a signed agreement; and be fully aware they cannot enforce the agreement in a court of law, yet still refer the case to the credit reference agency to essentially force the customer's hand.

 

'This is no different than them sending round the bully boys – it's complete arrogance on the part of the lenders who, in many cases, hold their hands up to breaking their statutory and contractual obligations, yet still run to the credit reference agency as a means of getting payment.'

 

AC

[foolishgirl]

You can't expect the media who get most of their income from adverts from the banks to publish the truth and wipe out their best customer.

 

Don't think it's even that Ruprecht. It's basically just lazy journalism. The press get fed biased press releases by the bank/CRAs, they see an eye catching headline in it & drag out the soundbites from the release. Hey presto, another article hits the presses & the writer gets home early!

 

I wonder if a case involving a default on an unenforceable agreement would ever make it that far anyway? The banks would probably cave in if they knew you were intending to take it all the way.

 

This case wasn't about unenforceable agreements so has no relevance for them anyway. Business as usual for CAGers!!

 

FG

[Undercover-Elsa]

Whooo..they have published my comment (U-E), although they've edited half of it out.

[100mel]

subbing

[jonoh1]

subbing

[along]

I have in my mind that there were some - more relevant - cases being heard on 8th Oct? did they go ahead?

[haggis1984]

I have in my mind that there were some - more relevant - cases being heard on 8th Oct? did they go ahead?

 

Same. Waiting with baited breath!

[saddler68]

I posted a link earlier in this thread. More test-cases on 30th November, following the Mancs cmc.

[MARTIN3030]

I posted a link earlier in this thread. More test-cases on 30th November, following the Mancs cmc.

 

 

You certainly did Saddler-here it is again;

 

 

Credit Today online

[zamtaff]

Theres an article in The Sunday Times 10/10/09 the source is the Ultimate Law. Its too small in print I will try to blow it up and post.

 

Boths sides agrred the test case personnal loan was unenforceable and the judge was asked to decide what that meant.

 

Mt Justice Flaux ruled: "Although the {Consumer Credit Act} may render the agreement unenforceable, the agreements remains a vald and subsisting contract and the rights and obligations under it continue to exist"

[enoughisenough]

Just taken from the BBC website

 

Newsnight will report on this case (a different case but still...) and the prevalence of media laws being used by large companies to restrict information on Tuesday 13 October 2009 at 10.30pm on BBC Two.

 

Gagging orders next...?

[enoughisenough]

Theres an article in The Sunday Times 10/10/09 the source is the Ultimate Law. Its too small in print I will try to blow it up and post.

 

Boths sides agrred the test case personnal loan was unenforceable and the judge was asked to decide what that meant.

 

Mt Justice Flaux ruled: "Although the {Consumer Credit Act} may render the agreement unenforceable, the agreements remains a vald and subsisting contract and the rights and obligations under it continue to exist"

 

Hi Zamtaff,

 

There is extensive discussion of the implications of this judgment here already. Go to page 43 or so and work through.

[Baggio]

Just taken from the BBC website

 

Newsnight will report on this case (a different case but still...) and the prevalence of media laws being used by large companies to restrict information on Tuesday 13 October 2009 at 10.30pm on BBC Two.

 

Gagging orders next...?

 

which case?

[haggis1984]

Just taken from the BBC website

 

Newsnight will report on this case (a different case but still...) and the prevalence of media laws being used by large companies to restrict information on Tuesday 13 October 2009 at 10.30pm on BBC Two.

 

Gagging orders next...?

 

This is related to a question due to be asked of the Justice Secretary in parliament later this week that the Guardian was gagged from publishing (although it is freely available via the House of Commons website). Nothing to do with CCA - more related to certain companies not paying taxes and certain companies covering up toxic waste dumps in Somalia. Ill link to further info if mods say its ok.

[enoughisenough]

Yes. I should have pointed this out. I was more interested in the general thrust of Powerful lobbies manipulating the media something that we have discussed extensively on this and sister threads.

 

I am however happy for it to be removed if it is considered off topic.

[haggis1984]

Yes. I should have pointed this out. I was more interested in the general thrust of Powerful lobbies manipulating the media something that we have discussed extensively on this and sister threads.

 

I am however happy for it to be removed if it is considered off topic.

 

Was a bit puzzled - it is a wee bit off topic!

 

I get what you're saying though - if they can prevent coverage of events such as these whats to stop them preventing coverage of financial news favourable to the consumer.

[zamtaff]

we need too look at the program tonight But seems to me a contract must be signed by both parties at least and say what each side can do or benefit from. without correlation i would assume any contract is unenforcable

[enoughisenough]

The way the mcguff case was reported compared with other cases decisively in favour of the consumer on these issues seems sufficient evidence of media imbalance.

[Tricky Dickie]

MBNA are trying to enforce an agreement and I have just found out the trial date is just over a month away.

The "agreement" they have sent in response to pre action disclosure is an application forms with my signature on and a completely seperate set of terms and conditions which comply with the CCA( not surprising as they were probably produced last week).

MBNA have actually confirmed in writing that they do not have the original agreement as it was copied electronically and destroyed some years ago.

They maintain however that the original document did contain these terms and conditions on the back and have produced a witness statement from one of their employees confirming their contention is correct.

Surely that can not stand up in court or do I need to get a witness statement from my girlfriend saying the terms and conditions were not on the back?

[the_shadow]

MBNA are trying to enforce an agreement and I have just found out the trial date is just over a month away.

The "agreement" they have sent in response to pre action disclosure is an application forms with my signature on and a completely seperate set of terms and conditions which comply with the CCA( not surprising as they were probably produced last week).

MBNA have actually confirmed in writing that they do not have the original agreement as it was copied electronically and destroyed some years ago.

They maintain however that the original document did contain these terms and conditions on the back and have produced a witness statement from one of their employees confirming their contention is correct.

Surely that can not stand up in court or do I need to get a witness statement from my girlfriend saying the terms and conditions were not on the back?

 

TD, they can claim what they like but a) They should have stated the evidence they will provide is hearsay evidence and b) You can question it..

 

Read this thread.. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/162535-documents-court-civil-evidence.html

 

S.

[spartathisis]

I would request that they confirm with proof that the witness was employed by MBNA at the time the app form was scanned and micro-fiched (is that a word?). If they were not employed how do they know it was a true copy? I may be wrong, but doesn't the witness also have to have a certain standing/position for it to be reliable (not just the tea boy)? If you were with your girlfriend at the time you allegedly signed then why not:), must surely carry as much weight as the tea boys! (I dont mean the girlfriend carrying the weight ).

[enoughisenough]

I predict a very swift part 36 resolution. Once again it's a case of who blinks first. And believe me it won't be you. An application form? Do me a favour! Chancers.

 

(You could call the table you signed it on as a witness and still be in a stronger position than they are)

[Baggio]

MBNA are trying to enforce an agreement and I have just found out the trial date is just over a month away.

The "agreement" they have sent in response to pre action disclosure is an application forms with my signature on and a completely seperate set of terms and conditions which comply with the CCA( not surprising as they were probably produced last week).

MBNA have actually confirmed in writing that they do not have the original agreement as it was copied electronically and destroyed some years ago.

They maintain however that the original document did contain these terms and conditions on the back and have produced a witness statement from one of their employees confirming their contention is correct.

Surely that can not stand up in court or do I need to get a witness statement from my girlfriend saying the terms and conditions were not on the back?

 

surely they cannot use that old chestnut? that would be one of the biggest whitewashes ever... if that held, then that would be it for unenforceables.

[Ruprecht]

RE: MBNA

 

You can imagine some high up exec in Delaware banging his fist on his mahogany desk, certificates behind him on the wall from Harvard Business School.

 

"THOSE GOD DAMN BRITS, ALL THIS REGULATION AND BS!!"

 

Pulls his .45 from the top draw;

 

"IF THEY WERE O'HERE AND THEY DIDN'T PAY THEY'D GET SOME OF THIS UP THEIR GOD DAMN ASSES!!!"