Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • That explains it then. MET's fantasy is that it's a pay car park.  You're only let off paying if you are a Starbucks customer which you can't be when Starbucks is closed.  'Cos otherwise lots of people would abuse the car park facilities on the far edge of the Stansted Airport area in the middle of nowhere to ... admire the bushes?  Look at the cloudy sky? The important thing is that we have around 140 cases for this site, and MET have only tried court seven times.  Even then, they had no intention of getting as far as a hearing, they were attempting to intimidate the motorists into paying, when the Caggers defended the cases MET discontinued.
    • She's an only child and he as a brother and sister. He has no will and we have done a check on this to find out if he had left one and nothing has come up. He has savings of around 28k His sister and brother are well off so 28k is nothing to them and aren't interested in his money. This just leaves my wife/his daughter. Would this still need to go to probate there is no estate e.g house or business to sell and the amount left in his bank is just small? When his wife died they just closed her bank account and moved her money across to his account and we just assumed that once my wife has handed in the death certificate and shown evidence of who she is the same would apply to her? We don't know yet the council have only just written to us today with a guide of what to do next.  
    • Did your FiL leave a Will and if so who is the Executor? Strictly speaking banks could refuse to take instructions until Probate is granted but In practice I would expect the bank to take instructions to cancel the DD if the Executor presents the death certificate and a certified copy of the Will
    • Hi   Sorry I probably wasn't clear enough. He had lived in the flat until December 2022 with Dementia by this time it was unsafe for him to have capacity to live on his own and he had to move into a nursing home. We had left it too late to apply for power of attorney so approached a solicitor in March last year for Deputyship. We were still in the process of dealing with it by May 2024. He passed away a few weeks ago and the solicitor was contacted to halt the application and we will just pay the fees of what work he has done up until now. My wife was the named person on her dads bank account but we didn't have the ability to alter any direct debits hence the reasons for applying for Deputyship as we were having problems trying to stop some payments coming out of his account Eon being another difficult company. We kept his flat on from December 2022 - August 2023. it was at this point I contacted Sancutary housing to inform them he was no longer living in the flat, it had been cleared out and was ready for a new tenant and that he had Dementia and had moved into a nursing home December 2022 and explained the reasons why we kept it on. As the named person to speak on his behalf I asked them what proof they needed in order to give notice on the flat e.g proof of dementia and proof that he was living in a nursing home and anything else they wanted. The lady in the upstairs flat and some of the other residence in the street had asked about him and we had told them he had moved into a nursing home. The lady in the upstairs flat wanted his flat for medical reasons so asked us once we had given notice could be let her know and she'll ask them if she can have it. We explained the difficulties and it was left at that but I did tell her I would let her know once notice was given. I contacted the company by email a number of times and also telephone conversations and nobody followed it up and it wasn't till the end of February this year that the housing manager for the area wrote to our home address to ask about him that he had been to the flat a couple of times and nobody answered and he had asked some of the residence in the street and they hadn't seen him for sometime. There was an email address on the letter so I contacted him and copied in the last 2 emails I sent Sanctuary regarding me wanting to give notice on the flat for at least 9 months explaining that it went ignored as well as telephone calls. I also stated I wanted to have his rent payments returned from the date I wanted to give notice which was from August 2023 as the bank wouldn't let us stop the DD without POT or deputyship explaining we were in the process of Deputyship. He gave some excuse about not having POT to cancel on his behalf and spoke to someone in HR and said he would contact the nursing home to confirm he was there with Dementia and if it all checks out we can give notice on the flat which came to an end on the 22 March 2024. There was not mention of back payments for the rent already paid or the fact I had asked to give notice in August 2023. Despite someone living in the flat from 1st April they continue to take DD payments for the flat and have taken another 2 payments of £501. another concerning thing despite Eon not allowing us to cancel the DD to his account the lady upstairs informed Eon that she was moving into the flat February 2024 and Eon refunding the account to his bank and said in an email sorry you are leaving us and canceled his account. Something they wouldn't let us do but a stranger. She also changed her bank account to his address despite the fact notice hadn't been given on the flat yet. So we need to find out how much information Sanctuary actually had for her to tell her power company she was moving into the flat in February despite the housing manager only just getting in contact to find out where he was. So a complaint is going into Eon and Sanctuary and we are going to take advice and ask the bank to charge back the rent. My wife hasn't taken the death certificate to the bank yet to inform them of his passing.  
    • Yes, I believe the Starbucks was closed at the time the car was parked there 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Claim Stayed – Due to Unenforceable CCA Test Cases.


Blondie40
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4302 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

well this has just confirmed what i said.

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Stubie

 

If the cases are going to determine whether defaults registered with CRAs are allowed, surely that is a Data Protection issue. Is the Information Commissioner being called or taking part?

 

Hi Docman,

 

I don't know the details of the cases, sorry.

 

I posted a query about the commercial court cases on another thread and a helpful cagger supplied this info.

 

I can't remember who supplied it or which thread although it is mentioned in the TD post I linked to earlier in this thread.

 

Sorry, can't be any more help

Link to post
Share on other sites

dont worry blondie.

 

What did the courts say?

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

interesting link there.

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advice from Court:

 

If object to the stay should make an application for stay to be set aside or varied.

 

Didn't feel I was going to get anywhere so just thanked them for their help.

 

Not really sure what to do next. Very confused

Edited by Blondie40
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Have seen this judgment before, in particular like:

 

9. …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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Blondie

 

I think the response from the court is really 'we haven't a clue what the DJ is going on about but we aren't going to ask him.'

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

Blondie

 

I think the response from the court is really 'we haven't a clue what the DJ is going on about but we aren't going to ask him.'

 

Think your right on that. I wonder how may more he's stayed or is going to stay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have just returned home after my court apearence for my N244 ordering Link to supply the outstanding documents.

What a waist of time, the Judge informed me and the claimant that due to the current court case being heard in Manchester by District Judge Blacksmith on the 8th Oct relating to this type of claim ( I think he was referring to the members of this Forum) and apparently his ruling is going to affect the majority of the cases on this forum . He has stayed the case and my N244 to 21 days after the court case on the 8th oct 09. Are you aware of this case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have just returned home after my court apearence for my N244 ordering Link to supply the outstanding documents.

What a waist of time, the Judge informed me and the claimant that due to the current court case being heard in Manchester by District Judge Blacksmith on the 8th Oct relating to this type of claim ( I think he was referring to the members of this Forum) and apparently his ruling is going to affect the majority of the cases on this forum . He has stayed the case and my N244 to 21 days after the court case on the 8th oct 09. Are you aware of this case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the link citizinB, It appears I’m not the only one.

Further to my post above.

The Judge also indicated there where a number of cases before the courts being stayed until the out come of the Manchester case .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Last January I received a telephone call from my bank asking me if I wanted to upgrade my credit card (Opened in Aug 1997) to a more flexible account. (Me thinks my old cca is defective) Just sign this new cca. (“I’ll think about it ”)

 

Thanks for the update TD.

 

I think the banks and credit companies know they have a BIG issue here and I suspect the amounts involved will have more impact than the bank charges fiasco.

 

With bank charges, the amounts involved arose just from the charges levied on overdrawn accounts. The banks only agreed to the test case the day before they started to announce their financial results. Collectively, the accounts showed that the banks had paid back or provided for over a billion pounds and thus their argument that it was not worth defending an individual claim on commercial grounds would have been shot to pieces. The FSA would have been the only organisation with prior knowledge of the accounts of ALL the banks and I suspect that when someone did the sums, the truth dawned on the FSA and the government, hence the test case. At the time, many thought the delay caused by the test case (2 to 3 years) would provide enough time for the banks to recover the billion or so.

 

Well, it has taken over two years to date for the test case but, as we all know, the world has changed (although with the bonus levels clearly bankers haven't). The billion or so set aside to cover bank charges two years ago seems small beer now.

 

Unenforceable credit agreements are more of a problem though. First, it means the banks cash flow will be affected. They may not have to fund repayments of credit accounts as with bank charges but they will no longer have an income stream from people repaying the credit card accounts and the extortionate interest. Second, I doubt they will be able to count the balances under the agreements as assets in their balance sheets, thus requiring a further injection of capital.

 

As for the immediate future, I think it’s almost anyone’s guess. The government have removed the cause of the problem for the banks (by which I mean S 127(3) of the CCA) for post Oct 2007 agreements but that is rather like shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. But that still leaves many pre Oct 2007 agreements unenforceable and remember these agreements were made during the explosion of credit facilities offered from 1997 onwards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have just returned home after my court apearence for my N244 ordering Link to supply the outstanding documents.

What a waist of time, the Judge informed me and the claimant that due to the current court case being heard in Manchester by District Judge Blacksmith on the 8th Oct relating to this type of claim ( I think he was referring to the members of this Forum) and apparently his ruling is going to affect the majority of the cases on this forum . He has stayed the case and my N244 to 21 days after the court case on the 8th oct 09. Are you aware of this case.

 

Do you mind stating which couty court you went to this morning? Did the judge provide any more details of the Manchester case?

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this the same case as the ones from Chester County Court? In the Chester cases, I thought the judge and barristers had identified over 50 claims that were to be referred to the Commercial Court which sits in London.

 

However, it is possible that these cases are viewed as adminisrative matters, since the law itself is settled. In that case, the cases could have been referred to one of the new Administrative Courts that have been set up since April in regional centres including Manchester. Does anyone have any further information?

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

Liverpool CC,

I did ask the Judge if the case in Manchester was based around the claimant not supplying the relevant documents that the claimant’s case was reliant on

He affirmed that it was. He also indicated that the claimant Might want to withdraw the case after the trial. ( I’m not going to try and read between the lines on that last statement ) Hope this Helps

 

Do you mind stating which couty court you went to this morning? Did the judge provide any more details of the Manchester case?
Link to post
Share on other sites

letitbe

 

The Court Service do publish the list of cases before individual judges but usually only on the day or the day before the hearings.

 

You could always contact the Manchester court and explain you case has been stayed pending the outcome of a case on 8 October due to be heard by Judge Blcksmith and ask for more information. I believe the contact details for Manchester are as follows:

 

Hearings:

[email protected]

Specialist hearngs

[email protected]

Administrative Court enquiries

Administrativecourtoffice.manchester@hmcourts-service.x.gsi.gov.uk

Switchboard

0161 240 5000

New Issue and Case Management

0161 240 5329

District Judge listing

0161 240 5207

Chancery / Mercantile / TCC Listing

0161 240 5307

High / County Court Civil Listing /Diary Managers

0161 240 5300

Customer Service

0161 240 5340

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have just spoken to the case manager at Manchester High Court. He informed me that the case has been passed to a Judge Holman. He is dealing with a Batch of cases dealing with the subject matter “unenforceability of credit card agreements with no documentary evidence supporting the claim”

Any thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure what is going on in the Manchester case.

 

I was under the impression the Judge in Chester that has sent some test cases to London did not even get involved in the enforceability issue as none of the bank's barristers contested that they were not enforceable and the issue was only if they can record a default on a credit file if it was not enforceable and APR calculations.

 

Are they trying to say if there is no agreement at all that nobody knows if they had the prescribed conditions/signature etc? Surely this is madness to try and argue something about a contract which nobody has a true copy of?

 

Maybe it would be fun to get a transcript of the Chester hearing, if there were 50+ cases being heard at it I am sure the tape recorder would have been running. It would nice to see in transcript the banker's barristers agreeing no agreement = unenforceable (agreements before April 2007 of course).

Anyone involved in the Chester case fancy pm-ing me a claim number so I can try get it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, these are the notes I made at the trial of DJ's comments:

 

 

This case raises a number of issue common to huge number of cases doing the rounds.

 

One CMC with over 400 claims ongoing in one court - Not a sensible use of court's time.

 

Surprised cases got as far as being listed far trial, as staying claims such as this - more practical.

 

Test cases on unenforceable agreements needed to resolve issues.

 

Civil Judges suggest stay pending test cases.

 

Rankine v Various Banks

 

Case to be heard late September which may resolve some issues.

 

Stay case until issues sorted.

 

Counsel – advise client if any more cases similar in this Court they contact Court Manager as this will affect those (also mentioned other courts in the County).

 

So, either something new is going on or he's not up to date.

 

Take it I'll get a better idea when claimant objects to stay.

 

I was advised that the CMC in point had issued a couple of thousand cases at a cost in excess of £1M despite there being a number of cases in from of a senior commercial judge.

 

This means that the jusge is most up to date

 

GK

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have just spoken to the case manager at Manchester High Court. He informed me that the case has been passed to a Judge Holman. He is dealing with a Batch of cases dealing with the subject matter “unenforceability of credit card agreements with no documentary evidence supporting the claim”

Any thoughts?

 

 

My understanding is that these are 'no true copy cases' so very relevant to most of us I think

 

GK

Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding is that these are 'no true copy cases' so very relevant to most of us I think

 

GK

 

What can they do if there is no evidence of any agreement though I wonder?

 

Accept the bank's claim at face value that is was enforceable and contained the prescribed terms and conditions and was signed by the debtor?

 

Yes the banks are trustworthy, they would't do immoral things like pay the directors millions in bonuses after making huge losses, whilst sponging off the taxpayer for losing their gambling bets, etc. The only argument is do they come before or after arms dealers for being the most immoral people on earth.

 

Isn't there already evidence that a large proportion of the banks agreements that do exist don't comply with the CCA 1974 for them to be enforceable? Isn't this enough evidence to throw out accepting no evidence of an agreement on it's own?

 

I can't believe we are even discussing such a thing!

 

Edit:

 

What's to stop the bank just saying "nope, no agreement here, but it was enforceable" for every case if this gets anywhere? Why would they bother producing it ever for any claim. If the banks succeed in this it would be like declaring them God!

Edited by Ruprecht
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...