Unenforceability Cases on hold until further notice

[pedross]

I have got the feeling that a lot of people are panicking unnecessarily.

 

This judgement basically changes nothing. We all know that an unenforceable agreement does not mean there is no balance showing on an alleged account. Only litigation can clarify if there is a liabilty to the debt. The creditors may not follow that route but they still claim that there is a debt.

 

That is sufficient reason why they can report to CRA's regardless of what we would like, but there are others. I am sure that RBS are fully aware of when they can report and when they cannot.

 

We still need to focus on the main issue which is the enforceabilty of the agreement. If we go to court and win and there is no debt, the general opinion is that the money is therefore a 'gift' and we could claim compensation for the adverse reports.

 

It depends how and why we win but the main thing to take from this is the fact that a lot of people believe that they will get no adverse reports. Anyone who has suggested this in threads I have been involved in will know I always disagree and point out the danger.

 

Some of the CMC's have not helped because they falsly claim it will not affect your credit rating which is one reason why the MOJ pick on them.

 

I am afraid that it is similar to the law of Cause and Effect.

 

Thats my opinion and I am sure that many will not agree but I think that new caggers should start with that idea and any better result is a bonus.

 

Pedross

[pedross]

Hi readalot

 

I don't think it's as cut and dried as that. It will be difficult to stop them reporting the information whilst the dispute is ongoing but there could be circumstances which enable you to get the default removed if it is settled in your favour. The same applies to the payment information that they report.

 

Its a long haul and its not easy but the end result is well worth while. What is right for one person might not be the right way forward for the next.

[pedross]

This is the main key to the whole decision and why they can report to the CRA's

 

6. — (1) The processing is necessary for the purposes of legitimate interests pursued by the data controller or by the third party or parties to whom the data are disclosed, except where the processing is unwarranted in any particular case by reason of prejudice to the rights and freedoms or legitimate interests of the data subject

 

 

The Judge said:

In that context it is significant that the ICO (whom the bank's solicitors consulted) take the view set out in their email of 14 July 2009, that it is appropriate for CRAs to record information about unenforceable regulated credit agreements because, amongst other reasons, such information may properly inform responsible lending decisions, irrespective of whether the liability of the debtor is enforceable and responsible lending decisions are dependent upon lenders receiving accurate information about the ability and/or inclination of individuals to repay their debts. These are the same considerations as lie behind the Irresponsible Lending Project of the OFT.

 

Pedross says:

The agreement is unenforceable and therefore the liabilty of the debtor is also. We now have the option of repaying the debt anyway if we can and if we cannot or do not want to the Judge has decided it is only fair that the facts are reported to notify other lenders of our ability/inclination to pay.

 

Those were the facts before the hearing and they still are now and I can understand the argument. The CRA's are there to help lenders make responsible lending decisions and if they had taken notice of the reports we would not have had a sub prime mortgage crisis.

 

However, in many circumstances the 'debtor' will have no liability and defaults have been used far to easily in the past as a punishment tool. Therefore, we just need to prove that in our case it is not warranted and we have the following on our side: except where the processing is unwarranted in any particular case by reason of prejudice to the rights and freedoms or legitimate interests of the data subject.

Thats a whole new post of its own and in the case in question I do not believe that the claimant could argue that.

 

Pedross

[pedross]

You need to do a bit of research before the 23rd Ste

 

For a start its no longer an offence if not supplied within 30 days.

 

Getting an agreement out of a creditor is very often like getting blood from a stone and if you do and its a credit card the total amount for credit is irrelevent.

 

If the creditor can prove a debt, agreement or not, as this thread will show at the moment they can report the information to the CRA's

 

I will leave it there and I do not want to discourage you from taking on the Halifax. I hope they settle out of court but not knowing too much about the case itself I am just pointing out that based on your post above I would not count my chickens and have a well prepared case ready.

 

Pedross

[pedross]

have they repealed that part of CCA 74 which gives the lender X number of days to comply?

 

don't think so.

 

I am not trying to disagree with Ste just trying to help with the case being so close.

 

It used to be a criminal offence after 30 days but not any more.

[pedross]

No it wont I will post a true case story on here about that exact subject

 

Please do.

 

That would be interesting reading. Was it in the small claims court though?

 

Pedross

[pedross]

I will repeat again I am not trying to disagree with anyone.

 

In fact Ste is absolutely right, it was an offence in 1974.

 

I help those I can and I can do no more than that. You carry on Diddy I'm off to bed. You're the real night owl:)

[pedross]

Are you real Baggio

 

Check your post on the previous page No.1335

 

You acknowledge a post and comment on it and then later you ask what its about.

Edited October 16, 2009 by pedross

[pedross]

correct.

 

i hope egg-sterminator can come back on and update us... he did seem to know what he was talking about.

 

Well I can only apologise then.

 

I seem to have got drawn into the off topic 'banter' that we have had on this thread over the past 24 hours.

 

I will keep my thoughts to myself until the thread returns to normal

[pedross]

Talking about court.

 

Good luck against the Halifax tomorrow Ste (P64)