Claim Stayed – Due to Unenforceable CCA Test Cases.

[jonoh1]

Hope it really is good news at last.

 

M&S sent me an application form back for my cca request with no prescribed terms. The application form did not contain my personal details and was not in my handwriting. I wrote back and stated the facts and they then sent an illegible copy of the same document. I again wrote back and complained and they then sent what they call a reconstituted document with no details on. They stated the account was not now in dispute and swiftly passed it to a DCA called dlc who keep hounding me. This was after another DCA had already passed it back to them.

 

Please lets have some good news for once.................

[michellej]

come on folks who knows more , we are all sat waiting on hearing this result ,.. will it set a president for all to follow ,.. yipeeeeeeeeeee , make a sad face smile , come on its christmas ,.

[Basil Fawlty]

Could this be the best Christmas present ever?

[michellej]

lets hope so , are the tables turning ,... can not be ignored forever once in black and white ,..

[johnerog]

Ease up everybody, lets get the details before we celebrate.

[michellej]

Anyone any news on this judgement ??????? still sat waiting lol ,..

[cymruambyth]

judgement passed down 10 am Xmas Eve

 

and a big F*** you to the banks who thought they would get away with blagging "reconstituted" agreements

 

the law is black and white and thank the lord it has been applied correctly.

 

Baggio states 10am on December 24th!

[Baggio]

i have not got a copy of the judgement, but i have spoken directly to a chambers that have got a copy... and the banks did not succeed in their attempts to get away with simply providing updated T&Cs in response to a sec 77/78.

 

the judgement will state they need to disclose a direct link to these T&Cs and the original agreement.... which we all know they will struggle to provide.

 

happy xmas

[supasnooper]

Thanks for the news Baggio......... an excellent Xmas present !!

[cymruambyth]

Oooohhhh, without wishing to jump the gun ........ thank you ...... this could be useful in the very near future . i will await judgement day with great interest:)

[Gallahad]

i have not got a copy of the judgement, but i have spoken directly to a chambers that have got a copy... and the banks did not succeed in their attempts to get away with simply providing updated T&Cs in response to a sec 77/78.

 

the judgement will state they need to disclose a direct link to these T&Cs and the original agreement.... which we all know they will struggle to provide.

 

happy xmas

Good news to a degree Baggio but does this not mean that the strict provisions stated in the statute as to the original agreement having to be provided in the prescribed manner is somewhat diluted. I suspect the banks will still attempt to create falsehoods regarding a direct link to keep the issues fudged as well. I do of course hope I am proved wrong.

G

[Baggio]

Good news to a degree Baggio but does this not mean that the strict provisions stated in the statute as to the original agreement having to be provided in the prescribed manner is somewhat diluted. I suspect the banks will still attempt to create falsehoods regarding a direct link to keep the issues fudged as well. I do of course hope I am proved wrong.

G

 

All i can say is that the legal fraternity working alongside CMCs are over the moon with the judgement and are preparing to issue proceedings on thousands of these type of cases.

[Baggio]

nice to see some of the usual supsects viewing this thread... this judgement may hurt some of you

[Gallahad]

That would sure warm all our hearts thank Baggio

G

[dp77]

Good news but I feel this would be a far greater victory if it weren't for McGuffick - okay, I know that centres on a very narrow area of enforceability, but given that ruling how severe are the consequences of failure to adhere to a s77/78(1) request?

 

The test case I'd like to see is one which defines enforcement. Still cannot believe a Judge has ruled that starting court action, with the specific intention of enforcing the debt, is not enforcement!

[kel123]

This could be a very merry christmas.

 

Could someone post it up as quick as possible because I have to get a W/S in by the 30th and it has a direct influence

 

Kel

[johnerog]

All i can say is that the legal fraternity working alongside CMCs are over the moon with the judgement and are preparing to issue proceedings on thousands of these type of cases.

 

Excellent news Baggio, when do you think you will have a copy of the judgement. You are our inside man.....

[Baggio]

i am sure the judgement will be all over the web later this week after it is offically passed down thursday morning in manchester.

[lilly white]

Powered by Google Docs

 

a little background

[texanbar]

Just had a letter from the court today saying my case (thread, Natwest taking me to court) has also been stayed pending the cases being heard in the Manchester Mercantile Court.

 

Can't wait until tomorrow... fingers crossed everyone

x:)x

[dizzyblonde1966]

I was in court today with Cohens,

This was the second case management hearing,

Cohens have recently admitted to reconstructing a DN ,

The judge stayed the case and transferred it to manchester pending the outcome of the test cases,

 

Heres the thread, interesting read,Cohens have been very naughty indeed

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/237020-can-howard-cohen-reconstruct.html

[Docman]

texanbar & dizzyblonde, I've just read both your threads in full. IMO it appears the other sides solicitors are trying to pull the wool over the court's eyes in texanbar's case and the judge in dizzyblonde's case was looking for a quick way out of court today!

The Manchester cases (and please someone correct me if I am wrong here) are to determine whether the bank's etc can get away with 'reconstructing' documents in order to meet requests for documents under Ss77/78 of the Act. If they fail to do so, the claims management companies [CMCs] that are behind the cases in Manchester, and then proceed to get the credit card debt/loan quashed on the grounds that the credit agreement is unenforceable/does not exist. In short, the CMCs are trying to use the Act as a sword to fight the banks who are running scared.

Both texanbar and dizzyblonde are defending claims brought by the creditor banks. They have asked for copy agreements as part of the litigation and are using the Act as the shield that it was always intended to be by Parliament to defend themselves.

If the judgment in the Manchester cases wasn't expected tomorrow, I would suggest fighting the 'adjournments'. As it is, if the decision is as we have been led to expect, (and with the holiday season) I don't think there is a great deal lost. But if the case in Manchester does go against the banks, then IMO both these cases should be pursued with all vigour. Use the existing sections of the Act (Ss61, 65 & 127(3) if possible) together with the existing case law.

[dizzyblonde1966]

Docman,to be honest the judge did seem very uninterested today,

On the last case management hearing he was very friendly and helpfull and ordered cohens to respond to my defence,

hence the reason they ended up admitting the DN was not a copy of the orignal but a reconstruction,which is why i thought the judge would want answers from them today regarding their actions

 

However i will fight this all the way, Cohens offered me a deal a few weeks ago with a 50% reduction, they havnt got a hope in hell of me accepting any deal apart from them discontinuing , im going all the way with this, the claim is flawed on every aspect, cca, Dn, Noa, pre court protocol etc

 

However im just a little confused about what happens next after a case is stayed,as this is my first one ,will i be able to go for a strike out when the manchester decision is announced tommorrow

 

 

DB

Edited December 23, 2009 by dizzyblonde1966

[patrickq1]

i think cohens will have to apply to the courts to have the stay lifted or you can apply depending on this case ok

[Docman]

I believe that an application to lift a stay can come from either party but happy to be corrected.

 

dizzyblonde, if I am right, then you could ask for the stay to be lifted in the New Year, particularily as we will know the result of the Manchester cases by then.