Robinson Way CCJ/CO Cap1 card debt - was unable to respond - now want to set aside **LOST** - appealed - **WON** Claim reset - **WON - Case dismissed**

[RobinWayRobinme]

Thanx CitizenB

[AndyOrch]

Hi Rob

 

I think the way to go is to request permission to bring forward the new details by way of a further WS on application.You may wish to check it out with the CC processing your appeal though.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[RobinWayRobinme]

Hi Andy

 

I was wondering if that would be the way forward. Thanks for looking in Andy.

 

Robin

[AndyOrch]

No problem Robin

 

BTW your SA was very concise,keep us posted!!

 

Andy

[RobinWayRobinme]

Much appreciated that you was able to look over SA. Just need to tidy some lose ends up and tidy my files then wait to see if I get permision to appeal without a hearing. Whilst hoping that will be the case I'm preparing myself to have to attend a hearing to get permission.

 

Will of course keep you posted

 

R

[nij]

i have been following your quest for justice since the begining and wish you all the luck.....but i recieved this in an email.

 

loan balances written off by exploiting legal loopholes are facing the unwelcome choice of either repaying their debt or severely damaging their credit rating.

A test case in the High Court saw a judge rule a £17,000 RBS loan as unenforceable - after the lender was unable to produce the original credit agreement within the required 12 day period. More importantly, he also ruled that although the loan is unenforceable within the meaning of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, the obligations of the original contract were still valid, clearing the way for RBS to continue to pursue repayment.

If a loan is judged as ‘unenforceable’, lenders aren’t allowed to take the usual legal routes to recovering debt, such as obtaining judgment, sending in bailiffs, obtaining charging orders and so on. Instead, they will be within their rights to continue to press the consumer for repayment, including the use of debt collectors, to lodge the record of any default with credit reference agencies, to claim any credit balances held under rights of set-off, and to rely on any security they may hold such as mortgages or guarantees.

Around 100,000 claims for ‘unenforceable debt’ are believed to have been lodged with the courts to date. Over 3000 Claims Management Companies (CMC’s) have sprung up as a result. The majority of claims are based on the notion that original documents are not legally enforceable, especially in cases where the lender is unable to produce original copies.

As we’ve reported previously, most claims stand very little chance of success, and a number of CMC’s have actually been banned from operating due to misleading advertising and over-inflated charges. We think this latest ruling will sound the death knoll for many of them.

Any default lodged with the UK’s three credit reference agencies will remain on file for a period of six years, making it very difficult to get credit in what is already a tough economic situation. A good credit rating is vital in securing credit, and also determines the rate you’ll be asked to pay.

 

it looks like the banks win again. The law is altered yet again in favour of them.

[car2403]

i have been following your quest for justice since the begining and wish you all the luck.....but i recieved this in an email.

 

loan balances written off by exploiting legal loopholes are facing the unwelcome choice of either repaying their debt or severely damaging their credit rating.

A test case in the High Court saw a judge rule a £17,000 RBS loan as unenforceable - after the lender was unable to produce the original credit agreement within the required 12 day period. More importantly, he also ruled that although the loan is unenforceable within the meaning of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, the obligations of the original contract were still valid, clearing the way for RBS to continue to pursue repayment.

If a loan is judged as ‘unenforceable’, lenders aren’t allowed to take the usual legal routes to recovering debt, such as obtaining judgment, sending in bailiffs, obtaining charging orders and so on. Instead, they will be within their rights to continue to press the consumer for repayment, including the use of debt collectors, to lodge the record of any default with credit reference agencies, to claim any credit balances held under rights of set-off, and to rely on any security they may hold such as mortgages or guarantees.

Around 100,000 claims for ‘unenforceable debt’ are believed to have been lodged with the courts to date. Over 3000 Claims Management Companies (CMC’s) have sprung up as a result. The majority of claims are based on the notion that original documents are not legally enforceable, especially in cases where the lender is unable to produce original copies.

As we’ve reported previously, most claims stand very little chance of success, and a number of CMC’s have actually been banned from operating due to misleading advertising and over-inflated charges. We think this latest ruling will sound the death knoll for many of them.

Any default lodged with the UK’s three credit reference agencies will remain on file for a period of six years, making it very difficult to get credit in what is already a tough economic situation. A good credit rating is vital in securing credit, and also determines the rate you’ll be asked to pay.

 

it looks like the banks win again. The law is altered yet again in favour of them.

 

Nope

 

Read from page 45, onwards, here;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/198059-unenforceability-cases-hold-until.html

[RobinWayRobinme]

Agree with you car. Pretty confident at moment that what I'm doing is correct. Thanks for looking in.

Robin

[r&b]

hi robin,

as u have a bit of experience with N161 appellants notice cud u have a look on my thread here to bestow your knowledge on how best to present it, whenever u get a min.

its regarding my appeal of a previous judgment...many thanks

 

Court Claim for O/draft from Nthmtn (CCBC) - Page 13 - The Consumer Forums

[RobinWayRobinme]

of course R&B, my pleasure.

[RobinWayRobinme]

Quick update relating to my post 216 relating to notice being given to Robinson Ways solicitors that to continue acting for their client without correcting error at start of proceedings they would be knowingly deceiving court. Guess sols wern't given permission to correct error by their clients as they have now instructed other sols. Must fire off another letter as in post 216

Robin

[iOiO]

Does anyone have details (or perhaps a link) of this persuasive argument?

 

e. Persuasive argument provided by Francis Bennion the draftsman of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

Consumer Credit and the Total Charge for Credit. Criminal Law and Justice Weekly. 4/03/06

 

As mentioned by citizenb in post #211 above

[r&b]

if u google his website (link below i believe) u can find quite a bit on this chap and his writings...i dont know if CB was indicating this but it's all i have to hand, which has been used quite a bit for prescribed terms etc

 

F A R Bennion Website:

Francis Bennion - Home Page

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

Any footnotes are shown at the bottom of each page

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 Trust

 

Ltd

 

 

[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.

 

 

 

167

Justice of the Peace (2003) 773.

[iOiO]

Thanks for that r&b been googling it myself and I had already found that

 

What I was looking for was his more recent writings dated 4/03/06 which as far as I can find he hasn't documented on his website but are made reference to here http://www.roscoe1.karoo.net/modified.doc

[dad]

@RWR

 

Re introducing new evidence at an appeal see the following case law for what any application must cover (From paragraph 36):

 

Sun Bank Plc v Wootten & Anor [2004] EWCA Civ 1423 (15 October 2004)

 

HTH

 

Dad

[RobinWayRobinme]

@RWR

 

Re introducing new evidence at an appeal see the following case law for what any application must cover (From paragraph 36):

 

Sun Bank Plc v Wootten & Anor [2004] EWCA Civ 1423 (15 October 2004)

 

HTH

 

Dad

 

Thanx for looking in dad. Checking out now.

Robin

[RobinWayRobinme]

In view of postal probs I phoned court today and found that CJ has turned down permision to appeal without a hearing so I have 7 days to request a hearing to seek permission to appeal. Can anyone help in advising me how this should be done. ie just a letter requesting it or should I make a formal application on N244?

Robin

[citizenB]

I dont know the answer to your question, Robin. Have hit the SOS button in order to find someone who does.

[RobinWayRobinme]

Thanx Citizenb.

Just had a few days break to renew some brain cells.

My thoughts on this is that I just need to do a letter as the order says "The Defendant may apply to review his request if he gives notice within 7 days of receipt of the Order"

Robin

[RobinWayRobinme]

Quick bump on my post below.

 

In view of postal probs I phoned court today and found that CJ has turned down permision to appeal without a hearing so I have 7 days to request a hearing to seek permission to appeal. Can anyone help in advising me how this should be done. ie just a letter requesting it or should I make a formal application on N244?

Robin

[citizenB]

I havent had any response to the SOS, Robin:(

[RobinWayRobinme]

Thanx for keeping on it CitizenB

Robin

[r&b]

hi robin,

can the court office not help with this? it is after all procedure and not legal advice. i dont see why u should have to pay a further fee (N244) myself but have to check i suppose.

[RobinWayRobinme]

Tried the court office first, but they were so vague and it came across that they were guessing that I should make an application on N244 plus £75 fee. Got a bit upset when they told me this , then reminded them that they already owe me £80. They tried to say that it would all be dealt with eventually. Do agree with you R&B, that the cost of making an application to appeal should be enough to cover a hearing enabling me to make my request for permission to appeal oraly.

Guess this is just another one of those occassions where they know that as LiP we are learning as we go along, so lets just frustrate their rights for justice. Off my soapbox now

 

Hows your SA going R&B?

Robin

[r&b]

thanks to your help with the appeal process, im onto the Skelly robin...thats the easy bit ...gettin all the docs in the correct format, as u know, is the diff bit of all this appeal rubbish....unless of course the bloody court office are as evasive as the opposition lawyers!!!!

the more you get to know the workings of this stuff...the more you realise just what a lottery it all is...fine if you re being paid by the hour...not so good if its for yourself. been a real eye opener to someone like myself who had the establishment is always right drummed into them....now its been summarily drummed out im afraid:rolleyes: