Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • to prove I actually sold the car. I have resolved to go to court and the SAR shows all the notes on the account. The fraud department flagged this and despite all entreaties, they refused to release the money. The buyer has send across a screenshot of his bank statement and I have the sales receipt showing I sold the car. I have also asked DVLA for confirmation.    Do you know which legislation I can rely on please and which forms to use as I think I have all I need to show proof of legitimacy i.e.   1. Sales receipt (Issued by me to buyer) 2. Bank statement Screenshot (showing payment) and letter from buyer confirming they purchased the car. 3. Letters to CEO and their responses 4. SAR 5. Cover Note.    it has passed 80 days now and I believe if the NCA is involved it should show up in the SAR, in any event I don't mind engaging relevant authorities and showing the proof and transaction history.    thanks B-Bunch
    • Reading BN's man Richard North this morning, he's unimpressed with the new FTA with Japan.   https://www.turbulenttimes.co.uk/news/brexit/brexit-a-deal-we-can-do-without/
    • Read up on European Enforcement Orders and whether these can still be used in Brexit transition.   As you have come to realise buying online with a co.uk company can be risky, if they are foreign, with only a care of registered address in the UK.    
    • No at the time it was taken out my credit rating would’ve been fine. This card was my first credit card and I wouldn’t have had any loans at the time. It’s only really from this time onwards where things spiralled.   Also I noticed my old address was used at the time I took this out. Not sure if this has any relevance but I recall you asked this earlier in the thread. 
    • A perfect storm is brewing which could potentially see customers charged a monthly fee for having a current account. View the full article
  • Our picks

    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies
    • Oven repair. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/427690-oven-repair/&do=findComment&comment=5073391
      • 49 replies
    • I came across this discussion recently and just wanted to give my experience of A Shade Greener that may help others regarding their boiler finance agreement.
       
      We had a 10yr  finance contract for a boiler fitted July 2015.
       
      After a summer of discontent with ASG I discovered that if you have paid HALF the agreement or more you can legally return the boiler to them at no cost to yourself. I've just returned mine the feeling is liberating.
       
      It all started mid summer during lockdown when they refused to service our boiler because we didn't have a loft ladder or flooring installed despite the fact AS installed the boiler. and had previosuly serviced it without issue for 4yrs. After consulting with an independent installer I was informed that if this was the case then ASG had breached building regulations,  this was duly reported to Gas Safe to investigate and even then ASG refused to accept blame and repeatedly said it was my problem. Anyway Gas Safe found them in breach of building regs and a compromise was reached.
       
      A month later and ASG attended to service our boiler but in the process left the boiler unusuable as it kept losing pressure not to mention they had damaged the filling loop in the process which they said was my responsibilty not theres and would charge me to repair, so generous of them! Soon after reporting the fault I got a letter stating it was time we arranged a powerflush on our heating system which they make you do after 5 years even though there's nothing in the contract that states this. Coincidence?
       
      After a few heated exchanges with ASG (pardon the pun) I decided to pull the plug and cancel our agreement.
       
      The boiler was removed and replaced by a reputable installer,  and the old boiler was returned to ASG thus ending our contract with them. What's mad is I saved in excess of £1000 in the long run and got a new boiler with a brand new 12yr warranty. 
       
      You only have to look at TrustPilot to get an idea of what this company is like.
       
      • 3 replies
    • Dazza a few months ago I discovered a good friend of mine who had ten debts with cards and catalogues which he was slavishly paying off at detriment to his own family quality of life, and I mean hardship, not just absence of second holidays or flat screen TV's.
       
      I wrote to all his creditors asking for supporting documents and not one could provide any material that would allow them to enforce the debt.
       
      As a result he stopped paying and they have been unable to do anything, one even admitted it was unenforceable.
       
      If circumstances have got to the point where you are finding it unmanageable you must ask yourself why you feel the need to pay.  I guarantee you that these companies have built bad debt into their business model and no one over there is losing any sleep over your debt to them!  They will see you as a victim and cash cow and they will be reluctant to discuss final offers, only ways to keep you paying with threats of court action or seizing your assets if you have any.
       
      They are not your friends and you owe them no loyalty or moral duty, that must remain only for yourself and your family.
       
      If it was me I would send them all a CCA request.   I would bet that not one will provide the correct response and you can quite legally stop paying them until such time as they do provide a response.   Even when they do you should check back here as they mostly send dodgy photo copies or generic rubbish that has no connection with your supposed debt.
       
      The money you are paying them should, as far as you are able, be put to a savings account for yourself and as a means of paying of one of these fleecers should they ever manage to get to to the point of a successful court judgement.  After six years they will not be able to start court action and that money will then become yours.
       
      They will of course pursue you for the funds and pass your file around various departments of their business and out to third parties.
       
      Your response is that you should treat it as a hobby.  I have numerous files of correspondence each faithfully organised showing the various letters from different DCA;s , solicitors etc with a mix of threats, inducements and offers.   It is like my stamp collection and I show it to anyone who is interested!
        • Thanks
        • Like

Unenforceability Cases on hold until further notice


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4023 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I won't go into to the why's & wherefore's that's already been done other than to say this judgement is bad law in that a consumer simply exercising their legal rights can be deemed as untrustworthy when it come to obtaining future credit. In other words creditors can form a black list of those who have succeeded in enforcing their lawful rights making it difficult if not impossible for them move on in any meaningful way

 

JC,

 

I agree strongly, that is the real outcome of this judgment.

 

Dad

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

JC,

 

I agree strongly, that is the real outcome of this judgment.

 

Dad

 

 

Of course it is. How dare the plebs enforce their legal rights to the detriment of the establishment money men ........... they must be punished:mad:

 

Not only have we got bent bankers we also have the judiciary helping them

Link to post
Share on other sites

is anybody really surprised about bent judges beign involved?

 

but... have no fear.... the more of a con they make of actual law, the more of a fuss that will be kicked up on appeals from the consumer/CMC side, fuelling thousands more claims.

 

not a good idea for the banks, they should quietly shut up and get on with it, brown paper bagging judges will inevitably result in a huge scandal.

 

there is no doubt this is happening in my mind and many others, i have even heard there maybe some kind of undercover reporter who is pro the consumer, who is going to deeply ingrate himself into the system to prove these judges are taking backhanders.

 

interesting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The claimant was represented by Andrew Moran QC & Brendan Burke instructed by MJP Justice Ltd.

 

According ot his website Andrew Moran seems to specialise in:

 

  • General Commercial Litigation with a bias towards all aspects of shipping law
  • Personal injury – including accidents at sea, on offshore installations and in ports & harbours

Andrew Moran has a particular speciality in claims & prosecutions arising from marine and river pollution

  • Financial Services matters
  • Professional negligence with particular expertise in clinical negligence
  • Regulatory matters –arising in Environmental Law & Health and Safety Law

and MLP Justice seem to concentrate on personal injury compensation claims.

 

So that probably says it all!

 

Would you have chosen these people to represent you in relation to a Consumer Credit case??? :-o

 

Wonder if they arrived at court in a boat? And what was its cargo? :D

 

Male cowdung perhaps!

Link to post
Share on other sites
i have even heard there maybe some kind of undercover reporter who is pro the consumer, who is going to deeply ingrate himself into the system to prove these judges are taking backhanders.

 

interesting.

 

Very interesting, send him our way if you like :cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course it is. How dare the plebs enforce their legal rights to the detriment of the establishment money men ........... they must be punished:mad:

 

Not only have we got bent bankers we also have the judiciary helping them

 

Quite So!

 

Couldn't agree more.

 

Looks like it's;

Let Bash the Consumer...

 

AC

Link to post
Share on other sites

Enraged...

The Barrister for RBS, Mr. Handyside QC put forward to the Court that RBS were a Responsible lender: Utter Poppy Cock.

 

The Consumer bailed out RBS because they were NOT a responsible lender!

 

Furthermore, there are so many RBS cases on CAG that provide evidence to the effect that, RBS was an Irresponsible Lender

Link to post
Share on other sites
if you have the most money then you can buy the biggest bulls**ter and RBS's Bulls**ter, bulls**ted over the little bulls**ter. In this case a fishermans friend

 

i was up in court a little while ago on sexual offences charges and i was coughing a lot as i gave evidence

 

the judge said to me

 

"would you like to suck a fishermans friend"

 

I replied

 

"thank you M'lud- but don't you think i am in enough f****ing trouble already!

:D:D:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

:rolleyes::rolleyes:

 

http://www.credittoday.co.uk/news/news-item.cfm?news=1359

 

Screw tightens on claims management firms - 08/10/2009

 

Royal Bank of Scotland has secured a victory in a consumer credit case that a law firm said will "tighten the screw" on claims management companies’ practices.

 

Mr Justice Flaux found in favour of RBS in its case against Phillip McGuffick who sought to declare that a £17,000 loan from the bank was irredeemably unenforceable under sections 61 and 127 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

But in the Commercial Court, at the Royal Courts of Justice, it was concluded that claimants seeking to prove their credit agreements are unenforceable under the Act are still liable for monies owed.

 

During the case it emerged that only two repayments were made to RBS between August 2006 and May 2007, when 10 monthly payments of £346 were due. Since June 2007, the total amount owed has been £15,066.

 

The account was referred to Callcredit, Experian and Equifax and the debt recovery process was referred to Apex Credit Management, but to no effect. It was then referred to Capquest but again no repayments were made.

 

The claimant’s solicitors, MJP Justice, then wrote to the bank in February this year to dispute the credit agreement on the grounds that no reference was made to credit reference agencies in the original agreement.

 

MJP asked for documents relating to the original loan agreement and argued that while the debt was in dispute, no enforcement action could be taken. RBS has received hundreds of similar requests from solicitors and claims management firms for the same purpose.

 

But Mr Justice Flaux ruled that the claimant could not prevent RBS from making reports of the claimant’s non-payment to the credit reference agencies (CRAs). The court was asked whether the passing of information to the CRAs breached data protection law, but the court found the sharing of information to be lawful and legitimate.

 

The case was referred to the Commercial Court with a view to define and clarify the meaning of enforcement in the context of the Consumer Credit Act.

 

Law firm Eversheds said the case succeeded in doing so and it will be "invaluable" to all lenders now dealing with challenges to the enforceability of agreements.

 

The court decided that bringing legal proceeding is only a step taken with a view to enforcement and not actually enforcement. Consequently, steps taken before proceedings start, including demanding payment and threatening legal action, cannot be enforcement.

 

The court also found that demanding payment, issuing a default notice, threatening legal action and bringing legal proceedings did not constitute enforcement either.

 

Chris Busby, partner at Eversheds, said: "The decision undermines the practice of panel solicitors at claims management companies selling their services based on identifying unenforceable credit agreements. CMCs should now be warning customers that running these arguments and ceasing repayment of loans will have an adverse impact on credit ratings."

 

Claims management firm Cartal Client Review, which was not involved in the RBS case, called on the Ministry of Justice to review how claims management companies are regulated.

 

Carl Wright, chief executive of Cartel, said: "I believe the MoJ should hold a joint consultation with leading financial claims management companies to agree a set of standards that can be implemented across the industry to protect and better inform consumers."

[SIZE=2][COLOR=SeaGreen][FONT=Verdana][URL="http://www.nationaldebtline.co.uk/"][/URL][/FONT][/COLOR][/SIZE]

Link to post
Share on other sites
:rolleyes::rolleyes:

 

http://www.credittoday.co.uk/news/news-item.cfm?news=1359[/quote]

 

 

Nice to see that rather than reading the actual judgement the journo has just printed whatever RBS' solicitors told him.

I have no legal qualifications whatsoever, so please check any input I have for accuracy. And please correct me if you disagree!

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Nice to see that rather than reading the actual judgement the journo has just printed whatever RBS' solicitors told him.

 

Oh yes...

 

Spin... Spin... Spin... and more Spin :-)

 

S.

Are You as Anonymous on CAG as You Think You Are? *Link*

 

The CAG is a free help site,should you be offered help that requires payment,please report it to site team.

 

Deal with your debts:

STEP ONE - Dont Panic! | STEP TWO - Priority & Non Priority Debts | STEP THREE - Personal Budget Sheet | STEP FOUR - A SAFE bank Account | STEP FIVE - Dealing with Priority Debts | STEP SIX - Non-priority Debts | STEP SEVEN - Non-Priority Debt-Repayment Opt1 | STEP EIGHT - Non-Priority Debt-Repayment Opt2 | STEP NINE - Perils of Consolidation | STEP TEN - RE-Evaluate Frequently

 

***** SERIOUSLY IN DEBT, DONT KNOW WHAT TO DO, TRY NationalDebtLine's MoneySteps *****

 

 

IMPORTANT: Please take my advice in the spirit it is given and on the basis that I am expressing my opinion, These opinions are not endorsed by CAG in anyway and are offered informally without prejudice or warranty of any kind. These opinions are solely based upon the knowledge I've gained from this fantastic site and life in general. I have NO legal training.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Apparently Lord Denning was wrong an elephant is NOT an elephant

 

This judgement MUST be challenged

 

Everyone says the same re: Rankine but it hasnt yet has it :-(

 

Banks have deep pockets ;-)

 

S.

Are You as Anonymous on CAG as You Think You Are? *Link*

 

The CAG is a free help site,should you be offered help that requires payment,please report it to site team.

 

Deal with your debts:

STEP ONE - Dont Panic! | STEP TWO - Priority & Non Priority Debts | STEP THREE - Personal Budget Sheet | STEP FOUR - A SAFE bank Account | STEP FIVE - Dealing with Priority Debts | STEP SIX - Non-priority Debts | STEP SEVEN - Non-Priority Debt-Repayment Opt1 | STEP EIGHT - Non-Priority Debt-Repayment Opt2 | STEP NINE - Perils of Consolidation | STEP TEN - RE-Evaluate Frequently

 

***** SERIOUSLY IN DEBT, DONT KNOW WHAT TO DO, TRY NationalDebtLine's MoneySteps *****

 

 

IMPORTANT: Please take my advice in the spirit it is given and on the basis that I am expressing my opinion, These opinions are not endorsed by CAG in anyway and are offered informally without prejudice or warranty of any kind. These opinions are solely based upon the knowledge I've gained from this fantastic site and life in general. I have NO legal training.

Link to post
Share on other sites

PS the court did NOT say the debtor was still liable in law They might still owe the money The debt doesn't disappear but it can't be recovered by recourse to the courts as the agreement is unenforceable

Link to post
Share on other sites

'The court also found that demanding payment, issuing a default notice, threatening legal action and bringing legal proceedings did not constitute enforcement either. '

 

This is blantantly incorrect - Im certain that the judge stated RBS has acted appropriately during the period of non-compliance with s77 precisely because they didnt take these actions.

I have no legal qualifications whatsoever, so please check any input I have for accuracy. And please correct me if you disagree!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh yes...

 

Spin... Spin... Spin... and more Spin :-)

 

S.

 

That's a lot more polite than I would have put it. ;):oops:

[SIZE=2][COLOR=SeaGreen][FONT=Verdana][URL="http://www.nationaldebtline.co.uk/"][/URL][/FONT][/COLOR][/SIZE]

Link to post
Share on other sites
PS the court did NOT say the debtor was still liable in law They might still owe the money The debt doesn't disappear but it can't be recovered by recourse to the courts as the agreement is unenforceable

 

Correct!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Handyside QC, may have been able to pull the wool over The Honourable Mr. Justice Flaux's eyes, in his opinion that the RBS is a Responsible Lender.

That may well be the case now, bearing in mind that the Bank is 70% owned by the taxpayer.

 

But,who in their right mind could describe this Bank as a Responsible Lender prior to its near collapse?

 

And, why did Judge Halbert of his own motion refer this case to the Commercial Court in London?

 

Methinks, that there is more to this than meets the eye...

 

As for Credit Todays spin on the case;

my words are too rude too write!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not currently informed enough to comment on the specific case here (although it doesnt sound right at all and the waters have been muddied further), however, I have recently sent CCA requests to banks.

 

What I want to know is, how does this affect people challenging the validity of their credit agreements, does it simply mean you should continue to make payments until the question of whether the agreement is enforceable has been answered? If it is enforcable, pay as normal, if it is found not to be, should payments then be withheld?

 

If you make payments as required, they cant note your credit file with adverse information can they?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not currently informed enough to comment on the specific case here (although it doesnt sound right at all and the waters have been muddied further), however, I have recently sent CCA requests to banks.

 

What I want to know is, how does this affect people challenging the validity of their credit agreements, does it simply mean you should continue to make payments until the question of whether the agreement is enforceable has been answered? If it is enforcable, pay as normal, if it is found not to be, should payments then be withheld?

 

If you make payments as required, they cant note your credit file with adverse information can they?

 

There's moral considerations to be made there.

 

If you continue paying, you're effectively acknowledging the debt each time, therefore can't legitimately dispute the enforceability of it - "well, you've been repaying it all these years", a Judge will say.

 

On the other hand, if you don't pay you will be Defaulted - enforceable or not, and this Judgment will be used against lesser minded mortals that don't know their rights.

 

Also, if you don't pay and they don't take you to Court, what are you going to do? Live with a Default that is inaccurate for 6 years? No way, Jose...

Always happy to help where I can!

:lol:

Beware of legal advice given on a private forum - do you REALLY know who is posting? Are they REALLY accountable for their posts? What if you follow their advice and get something wrong?

It was Winston Churchill who said; "Democracy is the worst way to run a country except for all the others"

 

Advice and comments posted by car2403 are offered purely without prejudice. They reflect only my personal opinion and do not represent the opinion of this forum or it's management. You should always seek legal advice from a qualified legal advisor. As a member of the site team, I disable reputation - reputation points mean nothing, please check my posting credentials yourself and make an informed decision. You shouldn't PM me and await a reply - I may be too late with a response. No replies will be given in Private Messages - just as with getting advice from the forum, getting advice via Private Messages is dangerous. CAG is about sharing successes so others can follow your example, this is primarily why I'm here, so please don't be offended if I don't offer replies in PM that doesn't comply with this. Help CAG to help others by keeping your thread up to date.

 

 

USEFUL LINKS; New User Guide to CAG | Can't find what you're looking for? | Intro to Consumer Credit Litigation | Is My Agreement Enforceable | Default (Surleybonds) Template Letter | Defaults - background, removal methods, challenges and taking a claim to Court | Digital Signature Guide | Overdrafts and the CCA

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr. Handyside QC, may have been able to pull the wool over The Honourable Mr. Justice Flaux's eyes, in his opinion that the RBS is a Responsible Lender.

That may well be the case now, bearing in mind that the Bank is 70% owned by the taxpayer.

 

But,who in their right mind could describe this Bank as a Responsible Lender prior to its near collapse?

 

And, why did Judge Halbert of his own motion refer this case to the Commercial Court in London?

 

Methinks, that there is more to this than meets the eye...

 

As for Credit Todays spin on the case;

 

my words are too rude too write!

 

Halbert did not refer this case to the Commercial Court of his own motion,at the case conference in Chester in May he asked ther assembled legal teams to propose cases to be heard and RBS legal representative asked for this one to be heard.There was no objection from the claimants legal representative so Halbert refered it.

Maybe the claimants solicitor should have objected?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4023 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...