Dissecting the Manchester Test Case....

[pmhcfc]

What about this scenario...

 

You're being taken to court by a DCA who hasn't got the OA...All they can produce is a copy of what they say you would have signed...What would stop you producing an OA that you have photoshoped which, say, has an added clause stating that if the debt gets passed to a DCA then they (the DCA) have no powers to take you to court re the debt..."This is the agreement I signed your Honour"

 

Isn't that as plausable as a DCA taking you to court with no signed agreement?

[pmhcfc]

There are all sorts of options open if this was the case.

 

Well, it's a bloody stupid ruling made by an equally (allegedly) stupid judge...It's my opinion he's hoping to get all of these types of cases out of the courtroom so the judges have more time to play golf etc.

 

If any DCA now write to me (3 years on from my original CCA requests - all of which defaulted) telling me I now have to pay up, I'll simply invite them to take me to court...what's changed?

 

I, for one, am not worried about this latest ruling - although what I said in previous post was slightly tongue-in-cheek, if any DCA did take me to court without an original OA then I will do what I said, or something similar.

[pmhcfc]

Hello Folks!

 

WTF?

 

Look people, a f-f-f-feint heart never f-f-f-fecked a Bengal Tiger so, if you allow these weasel words to sink home and undermine your resolve, as they intend, then you will be half way to losing before you even step into Court.

 

Be in no doubt that the Trolls' combined intentions are to make people wibble, and make them squeak into Court on the defensive, primed to accept the handy Counter-Arguments the Trolls have packaged up purporting to be helpful advice for your support. That is the whole point, they desperately need you to believe their nonsense is genuine.

 

The fact that they are here, says a lot more than anything they are saying, if you get my drift?

 

They are attempting to lead you down the garden path and straight into the Common Law Compost Heap via the DCA Duck Pond...i.e. a smelly dead-end that's as far away from your main Regulated Agreement arguments as the Trolls can take you.

 

I loved this bit...

 

I think it means those hotbeds of Consumer debate and support, such as: LINK Financial, Barclays, Cabot, MBNA, Lowells, Lloyds, Amex, Moorcroft, RBS, Scotcall, Capital One, Wescot and their paid assassins Restons, Mishcon, Morgans and Brachers etc!

 

Tell me if I am getting warm?

 

I do hope I have contributed appropriately to this recent reasoned debate.

 

Cheers,

BRW

 

Great post....

 

Makes you laugh doesn't it? These people (trolls) actually believe they can

hoodwink people into believing them. I know a few on here were taken in but unfortunately for the said trolls, some of us see right through them. It's a shame we won't be seeing Et Contra Pacem Regis on these boards again, well not under that name...Actually, I'm wondering if said person (so tempted to name names lol) had a good chuckle with his cronies when he came up with the 'clever' Latin name - which, in general terms, loosely means 'Trespasser'.

 

I do get some sort of sick satisfaction out of knowing he (they) did spend quite a number of hours typing his cr*p onto the screen, which was a complete waste of time. Unless said person was dictating to one of his secretaries and she had to type it all in..lol

 

Anyway, good riddance to bad rubbish. Perhaps he'll come back under a new guise and try to fool us all again...Better luck next time Mr ........ (oops, nearly said it)...