Claim Stayed – Due to Unenforceable CCA Test Cases.

[angry cat]

It was my understanding that the oft guidance would not be released until after the test cases and in any event, in 2010.

[RobinWayRobinme]

I believe MBNA lost a test case in Manchester today where they could not produce the original agreement.

They also threw in the towel on two cases yesterday in the same court

MBNA settled both cases and agreed to pay costs, one balance was 11038 pounds and the other was 6200 pounds :grin:

 

Hi Axiom

Been following thread with interest. Can you point me in right direction where I can get access to the MAnchester case where no original agreement as I am in court this week and other side cannot produce agreement.

Robin

[Baggio]

It was my understanding that the oft guidance would not be released until after the test cases and in any event, in 2010.

 

yup, it will not be available for public viewing until after these 11 remaining cases are heard.

 

but, it is doing the rounds in CMC circles.

[MW2]

yup, it will not be available for public viewing until after these 11 remaining cases are heard.

 

but, it is doing the rounds in CMC circles.

 

 

11 remaining cases are heard? Does this mean 2 have been heard already? Do we know thw outcome?

[Bigdebtor]

It was my understanding that the oft guidance would not be released until after the test cases and in any event, in 2010.

 

If the guidance hasn't yet been released, where has this info on it come from - and what effect does it have currently on any cases about to be heard before it becomes public domain?

 

BD

[Axiom99]

i have quick glanced this draft guidance, its about 30 pages in length... and my information tells me the banks were NOT overly enthused by some of its content.

 

Baggio,any chance of getting hold of this document?

A

[ruinedbynatwest]

If the guidance hasn't yet been released, where has this info on it come from - and what effect does it have currently on any cases about to be heard before it becomes public domain?

 

BD

------------------

If the Courts take notice of what the OFT have to say, then we will have passed a milestone ! The Courts were well aware of what the OFT opined in Story (they considered, subject to the ruling of the Court, that the CCA applied) and they ignored it, because a ruling that the CCA applied in Story was needed by both the OFT and the Bank of England who were following my case after Natwest had possibly misled the BOE - both regulators were powerless to investigate the bank without a ruling of the Court. So, ultimate power was with the Court.

 

It will represent a significant and very welcome 'shift' in judicial attitude should the Court show due regard to what the OFT has to say; the OFT fulfills (sort of) the part of the "Credit Commisioner" recommended by Lord Crowther in his white paper "Consumer Credit - Report of the Committee"

Command 4596 - except that the powers advocated by Crowther have been watered down. Let's hope we see advancement toward Crowther.

 

 

John Story

 

www.ruinedbynatwest.com

[SkemDosser]

my personal view is that the OFT getting involved is good for postive publicty for UCAs at last, there IS actual law and case law backing up UCA claims, bank charges never had either.

 

there are millions out there, struggling in a heap of debt, contemplating suicide as they see no way out.... but there is a way out, a legal way out.

 

which ever moral view you take on UCA claims... surely the banks messing up and being bailed out by the taxpayer is a lot worse than joe bloggs messing up his finances and getting bailed out by legal precedent.

Absolutely. there is NO moral issue here, as much as the banks would want us to believe, and the courts would like to impose on us.

 

Consumers must think like businesses; no business [particularly a bank itself] would continue in a dodgy [often non-existent] contract with another body if it could challenge and release itself from it to save money, so neither should the consumer.

 

As for the issues around defaulting look at Dubai right now; they've effectively put two fingers up at the banks and told them they can bay for their money back, but they ain't getting it. This in the end, may well be for over 100 billion GBP, and our clever, so-business-like banks may well not see a penny of it again.

 

Are the banks and legal systems of the west crying 'immoral' and 'irresponsible?' [for both Dubai borrowing beyond its means and the banks lending on dubious grounds]. No. Are the ordinary people in the west crying on their sleeves for our poor banking system. Most certainly NO.

[angry cat]

yup, it will not be available for public viewing until after these 11 remaining cases are heard.

 

but, it is doing the rounds in CMC circles.

 

 

AOL Search

 

http://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/index/campaigns/social_policy/consultation_responses/cr_consumerandebt/oft_draft_guidance_on_sections_77_78_and_79_of_the_consumer_credit_act_1974

[Baggio]

11 remaining cases are heard? Does this mean 2 have been heard already? Do we know thw outcome?

MBNA withdrew/settled on 2 non-disclosure cases.

[Baggio]

AOL Search

 

OFT draft guidance on sections 77,78 and 79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

never seen this before... and that is not the actual OFT guideline document doing the rounds.

 

i dont have an electronic copy of it, i quick glanced a hard copy.

 

as soon as i do have it, i will link it up here.

[B3rty]

This was the CAB response to the OFT invitation for comments based on a draft report around the various issues.

[dp77]

That CAB review of the OFT guidance is interesting, what the hell is a 'reconstituted' copy? Sounds like free licence to print T&C's onto the back of signature / application forms.

[angry cat]

That CAB review of the OFT guidance is interesting, what the hell is a 'reconstituted' copy? Sounds like free licence to print T&C's onto the back of signature / application forms.

 

I believe they mean a, conjectured reconstruction;

to the layman, a 'blue-peter'!!!

[dp77]

A Blue Peter? You mean 'here's one I made earlier'!

[angry cat]

A Blue Peter? You mean 'here's one I made earlier'!

 

Yes!

One made out of a fairy liquid bottle;

egg box;

cereal box;

cut out letters and numerals, all stuck on with Glue...

modern day blue peters are made with the aid of an, apple mac.

[middenmess]

I'm the proud owner of a 'reconstituted' copy agreement courtesy of Barclaycard:)

[kel123]

I found this very interesting - could this be proof of our governmet being in the pocket of the 'British' Bankers

 

U.K.?s Darling Loses Brussels Fight to Rein in EU Bank Watchdog - Bloomberg.com

[Axiom99]

I found this very interesting - could this be proof of our governmet being in the pocket of the 'British' Bankers

 

U.K.?s Darling Loses Brussels Fight to Rein in EU Bank Watchdog - Bloomberg.com

 

 

Governments are the puppets of the bankers in every country

[Axiom99]

I found this very interesting - could this be proof of our governmet being in the pocket of the 'British' Bankers

 

U.K.?s Darling Loses Brussels Fight to Rein in EU Bank Watchdog - Bloomberg.com

 

 

Whats happening here with unenforceable agreements is only happening because we have to some extent an independant judiciary- I could not see it happening in any other country in the world

[kel123]

Whats happening here with unenforceable agreements is only happening because we have to some extent an independant judiciary- I could not see it happening in any other country in the world

 

And who has resently strengthened this?

 

I think by Darlings actions indicates the goveernments stance and who's side they are on, and it's not the consumer i.e. us Joe Public.

 

We are the only G20 country officially still in recesion and they cannot see the wood for the trees, We are not even quoted in some circles as being in the top 5 important finance centres of the world. So it is about time they changed and looked after the populus and their needs.

 

They got it wronge and are still getting it wrong so why don't they give it up?

 

Germany have said that they are expecting another crunch in the spring and are putting things in place now! And are considering further regulations/stipulations on there banks. I wish old Gordy would make a stand and back joe public for once and at least he'd go out has a 'man'?

 

On topic _ yes because it effects whats happening

 

Kel

[ruinedbynatwest]

Governments are the puppets of the bankers in every country

 

This is a reality that can only be be tempered by the rule of law within the acceptable forms of protest that exist within our legal constitution. I have had to place faith in the american constitution where my .com protest site is regulated by international law - ie a .co.uk address would simply not be there.

 

It was brought home to me, brutally, on two accounts - and I shall mention one here - (the other is simply appalling and it involves a mid Atlantic meeting between Churchill and Roosevelt and, essentially two banks [one american, one british] during the second world war - at some point before D-Day - they were discussing Hitler's [continuing] interest payments) - the first, and not that palatable was within conference, by a silk who was brought in as a CCA specialist, Peter Smith QC, (who's now a High Court Judge) when I was approaching the High Court with Natwest V Story & Pallister - "The Judge will Fudge" and "truth and justice will be early casualties in this case" he opined as justification for terminating my legal aid certificate - because the outcome would be "potentially disastrous" for Natwest. We ended up swearing at each other and he terminated my legal aid certificate on the grounds that the judges did not like the CCA - "they are firmly grounded in the tradtion that if you borrow money you pay it back", and that I had shot myself in the foot by involving the Bank of England. I was pretty annoyed because I had been with Natwest for 17 years and repaid every single penny before I fell out with Mr Jackson because his handshake was worthless and because he taunted me "You've nothing in writing", and because, anyone who knows me will tell you that I am NOT a "round dodger" !

 

I keep repeating this woeful tale, and I apologise to those who've heard it before - but there's a critical point here - we have a Rule of Law - that applies to everyone, and we cannot allow resignation, "Oh, well, that's alright, then" simply because a senior judge is miffed that Parliament has been critical of the Common Law. What the hell was he (Peter Smith QC) actually saying to us (my junior barrister and solicitor were present) ? Was he actually saying that it is valid legal argument that a senior judge sets binding legal precedent on the basis that he doesn't 'like' something ?

 

Is he saying (as I strongly suspect) that the law has become sycophantic ?

Who polices primacy ? Where is Parliament's voice in all this ? Is it left to Mr Bennion ?

 

The Judges are not above the law. They swear to uphold Parliamentary Supremacy and the truth in Story is that they are caught red-handed by Section 8 CCA where regulated agreements were refinanced by the multiple agreement Auld LJ held to be unregulated.

 

What we must remember is that the Courts are a social barometer, and at the moment they are chock a block full with CCA cases that will be sending very alarming messages to the authorities.

 

It is no longer a secret that the banks are overstepping the mark !!

 

John Story

 

www.ruinedbynatwest.com

Edited December 3, 2009 by ruinedbynatwest
typos and political correctness

[The GodMother]

I dont mean to be awkard but the OFT guidance thing was posted months ago and is not just doing circles in the CMC areas. It was handed to me on the school playground by a hoddie. How they know who i am and how they know it would interest me is amazingas i NEVER talk CAG on school premises.

[the_shadow]

I dont mean to be awkard but the OFT guidance thing was posted months ago and is not just doing circles in the CMC areas. It was handed to me on the school playground by a hoddie. How they know who i am and how they know it would interest me is amazingas i NEVER talk CAG on school premises.

 

haha blimey

 

Can you give us any snippets on the s78 responses part, I'm guessing if the banks are liking it the OFT are stating the back of a fag packet can count as a s78 response if prescribed terms are on it.

 

S.

[angry cat]

It is only the draft that has been released!

the final version, will not be released until 2010.