Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Any time limits AZ might spout are simply arbitrary, the ONLY thing you need to be doing is informing them ''in writing'' of your new address.   Also ensure your CRF is updated and showing your correct address also.   When you send AZ the letter which needs only to be one line......   Sir/madam.   My current address is No.1 Mickey mouse street blah blah blah, please update your records accordingly.   Regards   And obtain ''proof of posting'' which is free from the po counter, send it 2nd class post.
    • The UK's competition watchdog says the merger between the ticketing firms could lead to higher fees. View the full article
    • @Andyorchnot what I have seen as all parties have signed for Sponser to be100% liable for fees.   @dx100ukthats what I thought it sounds like to be fair.
    • During that time my credit rating was shot yeah.    I got caught in a cycle of small payday loans with Sunny. I had an arrangement to pay with the company sunny sold the loans to.    I put in a irresponsible lending complaint and about 2 years later I won this and sunny paid me back a large chunk of what they loaned me. (had the choice to deny and push for more, but looking at it now I did the right thing)   I remember  going for the 118 loan at the time and was amazed I got it.  Then when I paid for a good 6-8months on the 118 loan I got offered the "loan top up" for another £1500. Which I of course I took 🙄.  I eventually got the total owing down to 2k (which is now 3.2k with AZ) but then ran into payment problems.    To answer your other question I have not paid any other DCA any monies.  Right now this 118 debt is the only debt I have.    Surely if I dont act quickly the likelyhood of the pushing  a CCJ is greater? Or do you believe because the debt is "toxic" that it wouldn't get that far?    Thanks again for your help. You wouldn't believe how much you have calmed my anxiety and stress. 
    • Allegedly ......Well thats something for you to address within your statement backed up by evidence by way of exhibits...I have had to edit your previous post referring to this amongst other remarks please refrain from making these statements within your posts and putting the forum at potential risk of liable remarks.
  • 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.
       
        • Thanks
      • 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 4016 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

CCA 2006 was passed by parliment and become law on the 6th April 2007, so any agreement signed from that date onwards was regualted by this new act.

 

The old CCA 1974 was still in place to govern all pre 6th-april 2007 agreements.

 

Hope this makes sense.

 

thanks baggio

 

i thought their was a section in the 2006 act that specifically stated it.

 

cab

Cab1ne-Lombard-Shoosmiths **Claim Recieved**

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?181761-Cab1ne-Lombard-Shoosmiths-**Claim-Recieved**/page25

Summary Judgement 01/02/2011 **REFUSED** set for trial "May 23rd To June 30th 2011"

DISCONTINUED 3rd MAY 2011 **WON**

 

santander" Responsible Lending!!!!!!!

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?219431-quot-santander-quot-Responsible-Lending!!!!!!!

 

Capquest "V" Cab1ne

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?262962-Capquest-quot-V-quot-Cab1ne

 

"STAYED"

 

CAB "Sittin Tight"

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

Top Posters In This Topic

If you want specifics, I've nabbed this from a defence by Citizenb, hope she doesnt mind me posting it up.

 

S.

 

"brill":D

 

just what i needed

 

cab

Cab1ne-Lombard-Shoosmiths **Claim Recieved**

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?181761-Cab1ne-Lombard-Shoosmiths-**Claim-Recieved**/page25

Summary Judgement 01/02/2011 **REFUSED** set for trial "May 23rd To June 30th 2011"

DISCONTINUED 3rd MAY 2011 **WON**

 

santander" Responsible Lending!!!!!!!

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?219431-quot-santander-quot-Responsible-Lending!!!!!!!

 

Capquest "V" Cab1ne

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?262962-Capquest-quot-V-quot-Cab1ne

 

"STAYED"

 

CAB "Sittin Tight"

Link to post
Share on other sites
"sorry" for butting in

can anybody tell me what section in the 2006 regs, states that agreements pre april 2007 are not effected

 

cab

 

s127(3) repeal

 

Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14)

 

15 Enforceability of regulated agreements

In section 127 of the 1974 Act (enforcement orders in cases of infringement) subsections (3) to (5) shall cease to have effect.

 

11 The repeal by this Act of—

 

(a) the words “(subject to subsections (3) and (4))” in subsection (1) of section 127 of the 1974 Act,

 

(b) subsections (3) to (5) of that section, and

 

© the words “or 127(3)” in subsection (3) of section 185 of that Act,

 

has no effect in relation to improperly-executed agreements made before the commencement of section 15 of this Act.

 

 

The Consumer Credit Act 2006 (Commencement No. 2 and Transitional Provisions and Savings) Order 2007 No. 123 (C. 6)

 

PROVISIONS COMING INTO FORCE ON 6TH APRIL 2007

 

.............

 

Section 15 Repeal of section 127(3) to (5) of the 1974 Act (enforcement orders in cases of infringement)

Edited by fermi
  • Haha 1

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
Coulda, shoulda chosen a slightly more consumer friendly tag line but all the main points are there.

 

Not the ideal people to quote but hey its a free (ish) country.

 

Gez

 

Same old same old,the journo didn't bother to read the judgement just rewrote previous innacurate stories

Link to post
Share on other sites
"brill":D

 

just what i needed

 

cab

 

Also, the Couldn't be Bothered argument from Francis Bennion himself (my emphasis):

 

Consumer Credit Act 1974 s 127(3)

As the draftsman of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 I would like to thank Dr Richard Lawson for his interesting and well-argued article (30 August 2003) on Wilson v First County TrustLtd [2003] UKHL 40, [2003] 4 All ER 97.

Dr Lawson may be interested to know that I included the provision in question (section 127(3)) entirely on my own initiative. It seemed right to me that if the creditor company couldn’t be bothered to ensure that all the prescribed particulars were accurately included in the credit agreement it deserved to find it unenforceable, and that the court should not have power to relieve it from this penalty. Nobody queried this, and it went through Parliament without debate. I’m glad the House of Lords has now vindicated my reasoning and confirmed that nobody’s human rights were infringed.

© F A R Bennion Website: www.francisbennion.com

Doc. No. 2003.061 JPN008L 167 JPN (2003) 773

Anyone who is defending on the basis of Section 127(3) should also include the reference above. Don’t forget to acknowledge the author and his website as your source. I would imagine that any judge faced with this would have to accept the reasoning for the inclusion of the section into the 1974 Act.

 

Els

BANK CHARGES CAMPAIGN CONTINUES - PLEASE SIGN THIS PETITION

 

Aktiv Kapital £300.00 SETTLED IN FULL

Capital One £741.47 SETTLED IN FULL

Citi Cards £1221.00 SETTLED IN FULL

LTSB(personal) £3854.28 SETTLED IN FULL

LTSB(business) £7487.97 SETTLED IN FULL

 

What poor education I have received has been gained in the University of Life

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I guess you have to talk to yourself when no-one else will, OT :D

 

Thanks for the info.

Edited by foolishgirl
typo

Any knowledge I possess or advice I proffer is based solely on my experiences in the University of Life. Please make your own assessment of legality, risks & costs before taking any action.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
just answering my own question for anybody interested. I have been told it (spml -vs -walker) is going to be a couple of weeks before judgement is handed down

 

Do you have a link to this case or further info OT?

The REAL Axis of evil: Banks, Credit Card Companies & Credit Reference Agencies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

just heard Brunnels are appealing the RBS case it seems ? if true their barrister is one of the top in this area of consumer law and wouldnt take a case he wasnt pretty sure he had a chance of winning . One cmc cleaning up the mess another has left i like that !

Link to post
Share on other sites
just heard Brunnels are appealing the RBS case it seems ? if true their barrister is one of the top in this area of consumer law and wouldnt take a case he wasnt pretty sure he had a chance of winning . One cmc cleaning up the mess another has left i like that !

 

 

Y E S !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
just heard Brunnels are appealing the RBS case it seems ? if true their barrister is one of the top in this area of consumer law and wouldnt take a case he wasnt pretty sure he had a chance of winning . One cmc cleaning up the mess another has left i like that !

 

Are you referring to RBS v McGuff? If so Fantastic!!

 

Can you link to further info?

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

I think this case might be a waste of time being appealed, unless they can get them to admit issuing a default notice, demanding full payment etc, is enforcing the agreement.

 

What we need is a ruling on an irredeemably unenforceable agreement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re Walker v SPPL Reserved (Scheduled 8/10 reserved 14/10

 

Also in the CoA SPML v Heath also reserved.

 

These are big judgments being handed down and given that they are reserved one must only assume that there are massive ramifications from whatever decision is eventually handed down.

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites
It was therefore a case where the court had a discretion as to whether to enforce. Ironically, the judge stated that even if this stage had been reached he would not have granted an enforcement order as SPPL’s approach to the agreement was "an attempt to circumvent the provisions of section 9(4)". Nothing appears to be further from the case - SPPl appear to have been trying to follow the requirements of the Wilson case in a manner which is not uncommon in the industry.

 

bunch of total winkers.

 

Agreed:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites
no no no

 

just read the last 20 pages, will take you an hour but will educate you.

 

not mis-inform you like the wider press who are in coherts with the banks in order to scare joe public

 

CCA 74 was a protective pieces of legislation for the consumer, it is still law in this country.

 

The Consumer credit act 1974 reads that any creditor (Your lender) is requested by the Debtor (you) For a copy of the executed credit agreement on the payment of the required Statutory fee (£1) Must provide the agreement.

 

If the creditor fails to provide the agreement in the required time.(12 business days) The agreement is unenforcable until the creditor provides the agreement. If the creditor has failed to provide the agreement for 30 days the creditor has commited an offence under the act.

 

For the most part the creditors will provide a copy of the executed credit agreement. If they do then it is down to fathoming out what is wrong with the credit agreement. For the most part it is mis-calculations culminating in an incorrect total amount for credit.

 

It is very handy to watch all cases that go to court and the result from those cases. For Example Halifax under Bank of Scotland lost a case on there credit card agreements becasue the Terms and Conditions were in a separate document with no clear links in the signature box. This means that Halifax cannot prove that the customer received a copy of the terms and conditions when sigining the credit agreement.

 

With this in mind and the fact that Halifax used this method all the time means that the success rate for making the credit agreement unenforcable is 100% the plain truth

 

If the lender does not provide an agreement it is your legal rights to cease payment and there is nothing the creditor can legally do. You do need to write to them stating this though that your agreement is now in a legal dispute.

 

If they then put anything adverse on your credit file ,,,the information would be inaccurate and would breach the Data Protection Act 1998 which reads any information held on a living person must be accurate and up to date.

 

If this does happen write to the credit reference agency informing them that the information on the file is disputed for accuracy and also write to the creditor advising they have breached the data protection act aswell stating that if the information is not removed you will sue under the DPA 1998 aswell as writing to the Information Commisioners Office you can also sue under the Defamation of Character Act 1994 i.e libel. Becasue damaging someones credit for no legitimate reason breaches that act.

 

Typical winnings are about £5,000 and an injuction form them doing it again although you can sue for up to £100,000 but its very likely that unless you are famous the court would see it as a bit of a joke. . The is a protocol for doing libel cases but for the most part when a creditor know you mean business the adverse on your credit file will be gone within 28 days.

 

Another thing that does happen is they start chasing you hard for payment and considering this its a legal dispute its against the banking code of practice and also the Administration of Justice Act 1970.

 

I am currently suing Halifax for blocking my wifes debit card on the 23rd Ocotober in Wolverhampton County Court. If I succeed it will be a case presidence and anyone who's card gets blocked will be able to sue there bank and win. It is highly likely that Halifax will settle out of court in the next few days. but who knows keep an eye on the posts to see if we have good news

Edited by SteEqWar
spelling errors
Link to post
Share on other sites
The Consumer credit act 1974 reads that any creditor (Your lender) is requested by the Debtor (you) For a copy of the executed credit agreement on the payment of the required Statutory fee (£1) Must provide the agreement.

 

If the creditor fails to provide the agreement in the required time.(12 business days) The agreement is unenforcable until the creditor provides the agreement. If the creditor has failed to provide the agreement for 30 days the creditor has commited an offence under the act.

 

For the most part the creditors will provide a copy of the executed credit agreement. If they do then it is down to fathoming out what is wrong with the credit agreement. For the most part it is mis-calculations culminating in an incorrect total amount for credit.

 

It is very handy to watch all cases that go to court and the result from those cases. For Example Halifax under Bank of Scotland lost a case on there credit card agreements becasue the Terms and Conditions were in a separate document with no clear links in the signature box. This means that Halifax cannot prove that the customer received a copy of the terms and conditions when sigining the credit agreement.

 

With this in mind and the fact that Halifax used this method all the time means that the success rate for making the credit agreement unenforcable is 100% the plain truth

 

If the lender does not provide an agreement it is your legal rights to cease payment and there is nothing the creditor can legally do. You do need to write to them stating this though that your agreement is now in a legal dispute.

 

If they then put anything adverse on your credit file ,,,the information would be inaccurate and would breach the Data Protection Act 1998 which reads any information held on a living person must be accurate and up to date.

 

If this does happen write to the credit reference agency informing them that the information on the file is disputed for accuracy and also write to the creditor advising they have breached the data protection act aswell stating that if the information is not removed you will sue under the DPA 1998 aswell as writing to the Information Commisioners Office you can also sue under the Defamation of Character Act 1994 i.e libel. Becasue damaging someones credit for no legitimate reason breaches that act.

 

Typical winnings are about £5,000 and an injuction form them doing it again although you can sue for up to £100,000 but its very likely that unless you are famous the court would see it as a bit of a joke. . The is a protocol for doing libel cases but for the most part when a creditor know you mean business the adverse on your credit file will be gone within 28 days.

 

Another thing that does happen is they start chasing you hard for payment and considering this its a legal dispute its against the banking code of practice and also the Administration of Justice Act 1970.

 

I am currently suing Halifax for blocking my wifes debit card on the 23rd Ocotober in Wolverhampton County Court. If I succeed it will be a case presidence and anyone who's card gets blocked will be able to sue there bank and win. It is highly likely that Halifax will settle out of court in the next few days. but who knows keep an eye on the posts to see if we have good news

 

fantastic post, well done sir.

 

one of the best, most informative posts i have read in a long while.

 

can i ask, how do you know all this? are you using a CMC?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4016 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...