Claim Stayed – Due to Unenforceable CCA Test Cases.

[frettful38]

Thats interesting!

Who is/was the lender?

 

 

It's Blemain Finance

[frettful38]

oh bloody hell now I am really confused as to what to do next after reading all that stuff about client cartel review aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhh:mad:

[Axiom99]

oh bloody hell now I am really confused as to what to do next after reading all that stuff about client cartel review aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhh:mad:

 

I suggest that you follow the thread on the forum Baggio indicated.There have been attempted discussions on many other forums about Cartel and as soon as they get wind of anything they threaten legal action against the site and posters and the thread gets deleted so it will happen here soon too. :eek:

[Axiom99]

I suggest that you follow the thread on the forum Baggio indicated.There have been attempted discussions on many other forums about Cartel and as soon as they get wind of anything they threaten legal action against the site and posters and the thread gets deleted so it will happen here soon too. :eek:

 

 

Too late,the thread Baggio posted about has now been deleted and I expect this one to follow very soon,sorry guys but try here ,make sure you're quick before it disappears

 

http://www.stokenorthlibdems.com/fin...artelindex.htm

[angry cat]

Couple lose £40,000 write-off fight - AOL Money

 

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2009/1176.html

[Docman]

Only an Appeal Court judge could split the definition of credit in this way. Watch out for the credit industry trumpeting this one from the roof tops. And possibly for this case to go to appeal further.

[Axiom99]

Couple lose £40,000 write-off fight - AOL Money

 

Southern Pacific Personal Loans Ltd v Walker & Anor [2009] EWCA Civ 1176 (12 November 2009)

 

 

My head hurts after reading this can someone interpret? Was this appeal allowed because the circumstances were different from Wilson or did ther judge conclude the judgement in Wilson was wrong?

[saddler68]

Not really surprised by this decision TBH. Eversheds ( pardon me) summed it up months ago

 

https://www.eversheds.com/uk/home/articles/index1.page?ArticleID=templatedata\Eversheds\articles\data\en\Financial_institutions\SPPL_v_Walker_05may09

Edited November 12, 2009 by saddler68

[pedross]

I think the vedict is wrong because the argument became too complicated.

 

After reading the verdict it would appear to me that the 'Amount of Credit was £18375 and was therefore wrongly stated on the agreement.

 

Therefore the original verdict was correct and the appeal decision was wrong. The case is different from Wilson in my opinion as the arguments regarding 'Amount of Credit' and 'Charge for Credit' are different.

 

Thats how I see it anyway.

 

Pedross

[Axiom99]

Not really surprised by this decision TBH. Eversheds ( pardon me) summed it up months ago

 

https://www.eversheds.com/uk/home/articles/index1.page?ArticleID=templatedata\Eversheds\articles\data\en\Financial_institutions\SPPL_v_Walker_05may09

 

Thanks for that its clear now ;-)

[Baggio]

there will be a statement on this later today, the sols leading the defence (keith turner) are hugely disgusted at the incredibily biased way the case was handled.

 

this will cause the banks more harm than good down the road, an appeal is defo being lodged.

 

hmmm, halbert himself must be very annoyed at the way his original hearing has been torn to bits by a judge who seems to have had his ear bent.

 

believe it or not, it is cases like this that will explode the brown paper bag myth.

[Docman]

Well, there may not be a brown paper bag but there is certainly the usual Bar bias. On the one hand, a Northern lad standing up for the consumer (approriately called David) and a City firm of solicitors and a QC expert in banking law and money laundering law who works for the top banks (ie very expensive) as Goliath for the Banks. Who said money doesn't talk in the law?

[saddler68]

Baggio, is this the case you referred to that was going in 'our favour'.

[Baggio]

Baggio, is this the case you referred to that was going in 'our favour'.

 

defo not.

 

this case will be won on appeal though.. apparently it was totally misheard.

[saddler68]

How can it have been misheard when Walker was represented by a top QC? Test case defeats like this come as no real surprise Im afraid.

[Baggio]

How can it have been misheard when Walker was represented by a top QC? Test case defeats like this come as no real surprise Im afraid.

 

well, the QC delivered a fine argument that was backed up by set legal precedents as outline in Wilson.

 

The law of the land was not followed, that is the bottom line, and i go back to my earlier point, this will cause more chaos for the banks and for others judges hearing cases.... as when the appeal is won, which it will be... the judge will be made to look like he was pushed in a certain direction, and did not clearly follow law... the banks will not come out smelling of roses.

[saddler68]

We are on the same side here Baggio and I hear what you say....I dont share your confidence though. Keep us informed...

[middenmess]

well, the QC delivered a fine argument that was backed up by set legal precedents as outline in Wilson.

 

The law of the land was not followed, that is the bottom line, and i go back to my earlier point, this will cause more chaos for the banks and for others judges hearing cases.... as when the appeal is won, which it will be... the judge will be made to look like he was pushed in a certain direction, and did not clearly follow law... the banks will not come out smelling of roses.

 

This judgement however flawed will obviously have an impact as many creditors might well now proceed to court on the back of this appeal.

 

How long or how soon are the defendants [or the law firm employed by them] likely to be before appealing this decision,always assuming that with costs of £100,000 reportedly already hanging over them,they wish to take it further?

 

Or can other bodies appeal it?

[Baggio]

This judgement however flawed will obviously have an impact as many creditors might well now proceed to court on the back of this appeal.

 

How long or how soon are the defendants [or the law firm employed by them] likely to be before appealing this decision,always assuming that with costs of £100,000 reportedly already hanging over them,they wish to take it further?

 

Or can other bodies appeal it?

 

it is 100% being appealed, you must remember there is a 100M plus industry out there willing to back this to the hilt against the banks.

 

the law IS on our side, that is the fundamental precipice of the entire claims industry.

[middenmess]

it is 100% being appealed, you must remember there is a 100M plus industry out there willing to back this to the hilt against the banks.

 

the law IS on our side, that is the fundamental precipice of the entire claims industry.

 

I'm sure you meant 'principal' but 'precipice' equally sums it up:)

[the_shadow]

it is 100% being appealed, you must remember there is a 100M plus industry out there willing to back this to the hilt against the banks.

 

the law IS on our side, that is the fundamental precipice of the entire claims industry.

 

Unfortunately it would seem the judiciary do not agree, not normally a conspiracy theorist myself but I believe someone stated on another thread 3-4 months ago that the judicial system was being steered from the top towards helping the banking/financial industry in any way it can.

 

I have no knowledge if this is true or not but some high profile cases seem to be going against what we as common people think is the law.

 

S.

[middenmess]

If the decisions all go against the Financial Industry,as they should do,then it is entirely conceivable that the number of claims thus generated and the billions of pounds claimed could bring down the whole industry.

 

This will never be allowed to happen.

[Baggio]

correct, but ultimately, our side could appeal this to brussels and even call upon the draftsman himself, in francis bennion, and ask his view... which he clearly states on his own website.

 

they can run, they can steer, they can brown paper bag... but they cannot and will not win the WAR.

[Baggio]

If the decisions all go against the Financial Industry,as they should do,then it is entirely conceivable that the number of claims thus generated and the billions of pounds claimed could bring down the whole industry.

 

This will never be allowed to happen.

 

Huge over reaction, it would certainly not bring them down, they have plenty of printing machines and tax payers money to bail them out at every junctre.

 

google "fractional reserve banking"

[Gallahad]

I agree completely with you shadow the politicians, judiciary and banking industry are all part of the establishment and as such protect each other to sustain the status quo.

g