Claim Stayed – Due to Unenforceable CCA Test Cases.

[Baggio]

any news?

[Blondie40]

Isn't the meeting over a two-day period? My solicitor is in attendance. I will be on the blower to him Friday morning.

 

Did you speak to your solicitor and get any news?

 

B40

[kimberley6]

I spoke to a solicitors office yesterday,who also attended,they said there won't be a verdict untill two or three weeks,but all went as they expected,which I don't think is bad news.

[andydd]

Subbing

[saddler68]

Did you speak to your solicitor and get any news?

 

B40

 

He was out. Spoke to his sec' who said we wont know the full outcome until the end of the month.

[Blondie40]

He was out. Spoke to his sec' who said we wont know the full outcome until the end of the month.

 

Thanks for update, I guess we all know this is can be a bit of a waiting game at times.

 

B40

[The GodMother]

He was out. Spoke to his sec' who said we wont know the full outcome until the end of the month.

 

 

Wont need to wait long then. Thursday is October.

[haggis1984]

subbing

[letitbeme]

Hi There, Just thaught I'd drop this in.

 

Does any one know when the test cases are up for a hearing?

 

30th September 09 before Mr Justice Smith according to the barrister who is doing the case

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/198059-unenforceability-cases-hold-until-31.html#post2395407

[Baggio]

Hi There, Just thaught I'd drop this in.

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/198059-unenforceability-cases-hold-until-31.html#post2395407

 

 

so much conjecture, there were cases on the 23rd aswell, no feedback from them.

 

this is a mess, the courts are a state, there is zero transparency in the entire system for unenforceables.

 

1-0 banks.

[letitbeme]

so much conjecture, there were cases on the 23rd aswell, no feedback from them.

 

this is a mess, the courts are a state, there is zero transparency in the entire system for unenforceables.

 

1-0 banks.

 

 

 

BANK OF SCOTLAND - V- MITCHELL JUDGEMENT

 

Quote:

 

9. Miss Gardner has given no reason for the withdrawal of the action. She is in no way to be criticised for the omission. She is bound to act in accordance with her instructions, and those instructions were presumably to say no more than she has in fact said. But this does not prevent me from drawing what is in my judgment the only inference which can possibly be drawn from what has happened, which is that the bank realises that if the issue were to be contested it would either lose on the issue or be at serious risk of losing. There may be hundreds of similar cases and the bank would plainly not wish other defaulting customers to get wind of an adverse decision on the fundamental point which is embodied in the quotation from Mr Berkley's written argument, which I have already set out.

Edited September 29, 2009 by citizenB
removed full judgement, not necessary to post everywhere.

[Blondie40]

LetItBeMe

 

I've seen BANK OF SCOTLAND -v- ROBERT MITCHELL before.

 

I love this bit:

 

 

9. Miss Gardner has given no reason for the withdrawal of the action. She is in no way to be criticised for the omission. She is bound to act in accordance with her instructions, and those instructions were presumably to say no more than she has in fact said. But this does not prevent me from drawing what is in my judgment the only inference which can possibly be drawn from what has happened, which is that the bank realises that if the issue were to be contested it would either lose on the issue or be at serious risk of losing. There may be hundreds of similar cases and the bank would plainly not wish other defaulting customers to get wind of an adverse decision on the fundamental point which is embodied in the quotation from Mr Berkley's written argument, which I have already set out.

 

B40

[letitbeme]

Hi There B40,

 

My point exactly, the Judiciary are aware that a vast majority of CCA’s are not enforceable, the banking system is also aware of the problem and that’s why they withdraw there claims at the last minute, thus stopping the enforceable issues being documented by the judiciary.

 

LetItBeMe

 

BANK OF SCOTLAND -v- ROBERT MITCHELL before.

 

the bank realises that if the issue were to be contested it would either lose on the issue or be at serious risk of losing.

B40

 

LIBM

[Blondie40]

LIBM

 

And after finding this site over two years ago and thanks to the information and advice on it regarding unenforceable agreements - that I have been able to defend four claims - two which the banks discontinued just a few days before the trials and one which was struck out.

 

And this one - currently stayed due to the hearing to be held in Manchester on 08 Oct.

[letitbeme]

B40,

It’s a numbers game with them. They work on a percentage strategy. We are the 3% of there debt portfolio that fights back, the other 97% succumb to there threats.

[Baggio]

B40,

It’s a numbers game with them. They work on a percentage strategy. We are the 3% of there debt portfolio that fights back, the other 97% succumb to there threats.

 

do you honestly think its only 3% that fight back?

 

i reckon at least 10% maybe more now all claims companies advertise heavy.

[kel123]

Baggio you may be correct but out of that 10% it maybe only 33.3% of them that see it through to the end game! And then it's a lottery ie. the Judge?

 

There is still apathy out there and that is what the institutes rely on. I think the tide is changing but it is a slow change and/but can it be allowed to continue, after all the government cannot change them - world pressure is trying but with what chance of success.

 

Properganda rules and money rules properganda.

 

Kel

PS. I want to be proved incorrect

[middenmess]

The more people who are informed about the possibility of making a claim,the more claims that will be made.

 

The more claims that are made,the slower the responses by the bank will become.

 

They are incapable of dealing efficiently with the number of claims now-they can only get worse as the number of claims increase.

 

The numbers could easily run to several hundred thousand possibly, making settling them more cost effective than fighting them.

[kel123]

Middenmess I agree in its simplest form. But never underestimate the oppersition, they have not made their £££ by being simpletons. Untill there is political will it is a game of chess of counter moves with no side coming out on top - upsa, sorry! the banks don't need to win, just create a stand off.

 

The other side of the coin is: the back log forces this government to act, only this time they make everything retrospective and we loose!

[saddler68]

Middenmess I agree in its simplest form. But never underestimate the oppersition, they have not made their £££ by being simpletons. Untill there is political will it is a game of chess of counter moves with no side coming out on top - upsa, sorry! the banks don't need to win, just create a stand off.

 

The other side of the coin is: the back log forces this government to act, only this time they make everything retrospective and we loose!

 

The banks have made their $$$ by the public ( including me) being simpletons. Now we have upped our game we are about to prove the banks are as simple as the rest of us. As for the Govt retrospectively moving the goalposts, forget it. The consumer IS about to come out on top in this battle of the simpletons. A month form now our position will be so much clearer. The courts will have direction in how to handle these cases.

[the_shadow]

The banks have made their $$$ by the public ( including me) being simpletons. Now we have upped our game we are about to prove the banks are as simple as the rest of us. As for the Govt retrospectively moving the goalposts, forget it. The consumer IS about to come out on top in this battle of the simpletons. A month form now our position will be so much clearer. The courts will have direction in how to handle these cases.

 

I dont think its wise to attempt to predict which way a judges decision will go to be honest.

 

S.

[saddler68]

Me neither, I was actually referring to the Manchester CMC in October.

[the_shadow]

Me neither, I was actually referring to the Manchester CMC in October.

 

So am I.

 

S.

[letitbeme]

Hi There TS,

What are the issues being ascertained at Manchester.

[saddler68]

I suppose there is the risk that the judge could re-write established case law?