Jump to content

You can now change your notification sounds by going to this link https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/index.php?/&app=soundboard&module=soundboard&controller=managesounds

 

You can find a library of free notification sounds in several places on the Internet. Here's one which has a very large selection https://notificationsounds.com/notification-sounds

 

 

BankFodder BankFodder

 

BankFodder BankFodder


style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4009 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

Hi

I am new to this forum, but have been reading threads with interest for sometime. I sent cca request to cahoot and received the following back, they have laredy sent me a default notice and tole me to send the card back and I was given until the 5th July 2009 to comply. I have had no further letters since then. I was wondering whether to send a SAR request

 

Application they sent does have my signature on it, but it states opening current account and credit card but I do not have a current account and never have had a current account with them.

http://i863.photobucket.com/albums/ab199/confused44/img023.jpg

 

http://i863.photobucket.com/albums/ab199/confused44/img022.jpg

 

Would really appreciate comments, as I am getting very desparate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you didnt send your card back did you? it has been known that if it ever gets to court that they rpoduce the card as proof you ha an account whether the agreement is good or not


PGH7447

 

 

Getting There Slowly

---------

 

Advice is given freely but is in no way meant to be taken as Gospel:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

No I didn't send the card back or replied to their letter

 

regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you post up the default notice?


Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you didnt send your card back did you? it has been known that if it ever gets to court that they rpoduce the card as proof you ha an account whether the agreement is good or not

 

don't think that in 99.999% of cases that there is ever any dispute about whether an account exists or whether money was borrowed used etc

 

you need to concentrate on whether the agreement is legally enforceable or not

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this is what I am trying todo!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well this is what I am trying todo!!

 

great- you got the DN up yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
don't think that in 99.999% of cases that there is ever any dispute about whether an account exists or whether money was borrowed used etc

 

you need to concentrate on whether the agreement is legally enforceable or not

 

Tragic case of Judgement because a cut up card was produced by MBNA at hearing. - The Consumer Forums


Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that's confusing me is on both of those documents they have sent, on the bottom left hand margin is a date code that looks like APR 07 which is odd considering it was signed 04. :confused:


Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

yes i've read that thread it's an interesting one but does not alter my opinion and i would make the following observations-

 

The summary of the court proceedings by the poster is very scant indeed

 

No mention is made as to how well prepared he was when he went into court, whether for example he had his arguments and his legal authorities for those argument prepared and available to the judge and the other side

 

the production of a cut up card is a variation on the question "did you have/use the money and one which he should have been prepared for even it if was thrown from left field and after he had used his prepared defence and counter argument to the point should have finished his retort with a polite but clear request that were the judge to make a ruling on that point alone would he kindly make a full record of the reasoning leading to his decision .

 

There is no mention as to whether he questioned or counter argued what possible relevance the credit card and or the signature on it had to the claim/defence.

 

(the creditor could just as easily have produced the account statements to the court and asked the consumer if he authorised the purchases on them by using his card - or simply just asked the question)

 

it is a question IMO that a consumer would be a fool to deny or to obfuscate on - he either did or did not have the money and if he did then he should say so firmly and then (knowing why the question was asked) use his prepared arguments to negate the point

 

 

It is my (unqualified) opinion that this was a bad judgement and could have been appealed (but appreciate that this is not always financially possible)

 

I also note that as far as i can tell it is the only case mentioned on the forum that this has led to a judgement ( no doubt i will be corrected if not) so should not be a cause for panic- and given the sparse account of the event I am not sure if it was confirmed that this was the sole reason the judge gave to find against? I apologise if i missed that in the thread somewhere.

 

 

Personally i would suggest it is never a good idea to try to hoodwink the judge, lie to him or make a smart arse reply (such as for instance many of those posted on the thread "what should i say if the judge asks me if i had the money") to such a question

 

I would suggest that more often that not if that question is asked the judge is wanting to know how well you know your ground rather than the answer ( which clearly he already knows the answer to).

 

 

I believe that in the lower court especially, where the judge has more discretion to make a decision on balance as to who is making the best witness and the best case, that honesty and a common sense approach can win the day as likely as not

 

in fact although many cases in the higher court are decided on legal points i believe that in cases of consumer protection laws in particular that even then common sense rules most of the time

 

Just my own unqualified comments and thoughts

 

(Its late i'm bored cant sleep and fancied a good old session on the keyboard)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is my (unqualified) opinion that this was a bad judgement and could have been appealed (but appreciate that this is not always financially possible)

I agree it was a bad judgement, he probably would have appealed given the chance, but unfortunately at the time he was suffering from cancer and has subsequently passed away.

 

The moral of that particular thread is that although an enforceable CCA was absent & this was argued in court along with case law, the fact is that this particular judge took it upon himself to find for the plaintiff on the production of the credit card.

 

The whole case revolved around the enforcibilty of the agreement and that credit card had no bearing on it. Using the logic of that decision the whole of CCA 1974 may as well be scrapped. The existence of a credit card does not prove that an enforceable agreement is in place.

 

That particular judge totally ignored the precedences set in higher courts; Dimond v Lovell [2000] 2 WLR 1121 and to the authority of the House of Lords in Wilson-v- FCT [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul).


Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree it was a bad judgement, he probably would have appealed given the chance, but unfortunately at the time he was suffering from cancer and has subsequently passed away.

 

The moral of that particular thread is that although an enforceable CCA was absent & this was argued in court along with case law, the fact is that this particular judge took it upon himself to find for the plaintiff on the production of the credit card.

 

The whole case revolved around the enforcibilty of the agreement and that credit card had no bearing on it. Using the logic of that decision the whole of CCA 1974 may as well be scrapped. The existence of a credit card does not prove that an enforceable agreement is in place.

 

That particular judge totally ignored the precedences set in higher courts; WILSON Vs FCT (2003) UKHL; Dimond v Lovell [2000] 2 WLR 1121 and to the authority of the House of Lords in Wilson-v- FCT [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul).

 

he sure did- makes you wonder about little brown envelopes doesnt it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
don't think that in 99.999% of cases that there is ever any dispute about whether an account exists or whether money was borrowed used etc

 

you need to concentrate on whether the agreement is legally enforceable or not

 

That was not the point I was making, if there is no agreement then as has been stated earlier a card can be produced:(


PGH7447

 

 

Getting There Slowly

---------

 

Advice is given freely but is in no way meant to be taken as Gospel:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One thing that's confusing me is on both of those documents they have sent, on the bottom left hand margin is a date code that looks like APR 07 which is odd considering it was signed 04. :confused:

Hi

That date is on all their paperwork/letters received.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
great- you got the DN up yet?

sorry dn was with halifax not cca, the only default notice I have received on cahoot so far is late repayment fee of £12.00 which was received on 16th may2009.

I have posted the default notice on a new thread

sorry for the confusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That was not the point I was making, if there is no agreement then as has been stated earlier a card can be produced:(

 

I'm not quite sure what your point is? what is the relevance of a card being produced?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One thing that's confusing me is on both of those documents they have sent, on the bottom left hand margin is a date code that looks like APR 07 which is odd considering it was signed 04. :confused:

 

the printers code i think - one of the things i always look for- especially when they send two sheets and allege one is the back of the other!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not quite sure what your point is? what is the relevance of a card being produced?

 

if they produce a card with a SIGNATURE then that could count as an agreement

 

see post 9


PGH7447

 

 

Getting There Slowly

---------

 

Advice is given freely but is in no way meant to be taken as Gospel:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could somebody tell me what todo next, should I send a SAR or request to see original document at their offices

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes sorry we are getting side tracked over semantics.

 

Send the OC a sar request and see what they come back with asking for everything they hold on you


PGH7447

 

 

Getting There Slowly

---------

 

Advice is given freely but is in no way meant to be taken as Gospel:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if they produce a card with a SIGNATURE then that could count as an agreement

 

see post 9

 

ah yes i see - but if you follow the link on this and read the thread regarding the lost case i think you will find that this was a one off peverse judgement which cannot be substantiated in law

 

the consumer credit act does not say that in order to be properly executed or enforceable an agreement must be signed by both parties and have the prescribed terms within its four corners otherwise a signed credit card will do!

 

as i previously said virtually No one can say that they didn' have or use the money and the point being made in court with the cut up credit card coould just as easily have been made by asking the defendent if he had had the funds

 

the question is not that a debt does not exist (for it plainly does) but rather if the creditor can legally enforce it and/or that the court is prevented by certain legislation from ruling upon it in the creditors favour

 

hope that helps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou, will send s a r today

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see where you are coming from, but better to be safe than sorry especially if Judges are not that au-fait with consumer agreements as was the case in post 9


PGH7447

 

 

Getting There Slowly

---------

 

Advice is given freely but is in no way meant to be taken as Gospel:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thankyou, will send s a r today

 

i cant quite read the cca properly but it seems as if it is properly executed,

 

you have had notices of default

 

you WILL eventually get a default notice in which you will be given an opportunity to remedy the default

 

you could put the payments into a bank account and wait for them to issue a dn and see if they cock it up . if it is ok you could then pay over the money from the bank to rectify it and your back to square one!

 

pesonally i am not keen on getting an early SAR for the reason that if they go down the DN and termination route you may need to get a SECOND sar to gather information from their files to cover the period from when you first requested it to then cover their actions from that date forward (if that makes sense)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...