Welcome finance - what can i reclaim/dispute

[Sand-Dancer0191]

If an agreement was made under CCA1974 and the declaration signed was to be bound by that act.

Q. Should that agreement not state " amended 2006" or whatever.

 

This is a legal document....therefor should it not encompass the relevent law it relies on in the terms and conditions..And more importantly in the declaration which you sign and agree to be bound by.

[MARTIN3030]

moved here.

[MARTIN3030]

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/en/ukpgaen_20060014_en.pdf

[Sand-Dancer0191]

Thanks for the link MARTIN:D

 

So reading that.......My loan should read Regulated Agreement made under the CCA 2006...would that be a valid point to make in court or will it be pushed aside as a technicality... because the 2006 act is not concerned with technicality's

[freethemice]

The courts regularly 'brush aside' far more important things than that.

I would say that as these unsecured debts can become secure throught the courts and a charging order that a statement,

"your home could be at risk if you fail to maintain payments",

should also be included but they don't tell you that when you sign.

[The Mould]

Thanks for the link MARTIN:D

 

So reading that.......My loan should read Regulated Agreement made under the CCA 2006...would that be a valid point to make in court or will it be pushed aside as a technicality... because the 2006 act is not concerned with technicality's

 

 

Hello Sand-Dancer,

 

Sorry but no, that is not a defence, has a claim been issued by your creditor, if so, what exactly do you dispute about the debt/the amount claimed?

 

Can you give any more details on this matter?

 

Kind Regards

 

The Mould

[Sand-Dancer0191]

No claim as yet ..but am expecting one.

At the moment I'm just listing all the discrepency's on the agreement so far some are trivial / some incompetance and some unlawful

[The Mould]

No claim as yet ..but am expecting one.

At the moment I'm just listing all the discrepency's on the agreement so far some are trivial / some incompetance and some unlawful

 

OK Sand-Dancer,

 

What about the default notice, can you post that up?

 

Kind Regards

 

The Mould

[Sand-Dancer0191]

Expecting to go to court very soon regarding my wifes acc.

Question is she is defending the case BUT hasn't got the nerve....CAN I do it for her if we both attend.

If so is there any case law or ref to me defending my wife:|

[postggj]

Has a claim been issued yet

 

give a link please

[beyondhope]

Hiya I most certainly can advise on this as we became rather unstuck by it and it cost us £625 in their costs when they tried to get it struck out.

 

There is something called a Litigation Friend - this is for minors and those that arent of sound mind due to illness and such

 

There is something called a McKensie Friend - this is where you would go into court with your wife but not speak to anyone other than your wife you are basically moral support

 

There is something called a lay representative - this is where you speak on behalf of your wife but your wife has to be there

 

Look into these and see which suits you best We came unstuck by calling me a litigation friend (when i wanted to be lay representative) and as such my signature was on the claim form issued and they wanted the case struck out as I am not and have never have been a customer of welcome and was therefore classed as vexatious thankfully the judge was on our side and allowed leave for a new N1 to be issued and slashed their costs to less than half what they asked for!

[postggj]

Google court buddy as well

[beyondhope]

can you link to that postggj because nothing is coming up for me when I do that? nothing court related anyway!

Edited September 21, 2010 by beyondhope
ridiculous keyboard not putting in half the letters!

[postggj]

Ill dig it out

 

surfacegent did a post on it

[beyondhope]

I have searched high and low and cannot find 'court buddy' unless it is another name for one of the things I have already described

[Sand-Dancer0191]

Can't find anything on court buddy either...but the lay representative looks like what I need...Do I need to inform the court before the hearing or can I just turn up and drop them in the mire

[beyondhope]

Thats exactly what I am doing for hubby she has to be with you but you speak on her behalf, you need to inform the usher on arrival so he can run it past judge but theres never normally a problem and if some twist of fate means they refuse (I have no idea on what grounds they could possibly but just to play devils advocate) you are already there to be mckenzie friend and show her what to say when without speaking for her

[Sand-Dancer0191]

BEYONDHOPE.....just found this in my bookmarks which may interest you.....

Clarkson -v- Gilbert and others [2000] EWCA Civ 3018; [2000] CP Rep 58; [2000] 3 FCR 10; [2000] 2 FLR 839; [2000] Fam Law 808

14 Jun 2000

CA

Lord Woolf CJ, Aldous and Waller LJJ

Civil Procedure Rules, Legal Professions, Litigation Practice Casemap

 

The court considered the restrictions on lay representatives appearing in court as the related to relatives of the party. Held: The same objections to granting rights of audience did not apply to a husband who merely wished to assist his wife by representing her in court. Where a close relative was seeking to represent a party the question was whether there was good reason on the facts to grant it, such as ill health or lack of means.

Lord Woolf CJ said: "The overriding objective is that the courts should do justice. Now that legal aid is not available as readily as it was in the past means that there are going to be situations where litigants are forced to bring proceedings in person when they will need assistance. However, if they are litigants in person they must, in my judgment, establish why they need some other person who is not qualified to appear as an advocate on their behalf. In the ordinary way it will be for them to satisfy the court that that is appropriate. If somebody's health does not, or may not, enable them to conduct proceedings themselves, and if they lack means, those are the sort of circumstances that can justify a court saying that they should have somebody who can act as an advocate on their behalf."

He qualified the decision in D v S saying: "what I indicated in that case was intended for a situation which was of the sort there described and did not deal with a situation where a husband wished to appear for his wife. It does not matter whether it is said that the position is different in that case or whether it is said that the fact that a husband wishes to appear for somebody who is part of the same family makes it an exceptional situation. It is clear that the objections to someone setting themselves up as an unqualified advocate do not exist in a matter where a husband is merely seeking to assist his wife."

In this case: "I am satisfied that there would be a danger of Professor Clarkson being deprived of her right to have the case conducted before the courts in a way which would enable her claims to be investigated if she did not have the assistance of her husband as an advocate."

Waller LJ said: "I agree with my Lord on the proper principles to be applied to an application for a close relative to represent a litigant in person in order to have that right of audience. I also associate myself with my Lord's remarks in relation to his judgment in D v S (Rights of Audience) [1997] 1 FLR 724; I was a party to that judgment on that occasion. The position of a close relative seeking to exercise a right of audience is very different from the circumstances with which that case was concerned and it is unfortunate that the judge was possibly misled into applying a wrong test, as he did."

Clarke LJ said: "I agree with both judgments. The judge directed himself that the question which he should answer was whether there were exceptional circumstances which justified granting Mr Keter rights of audience under s 27(2)© of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990. I agree with my Lords that that is not the relevant question in a case of this kind. As I see it, the question is simply whether, in all the circumstances of the case, the court should exercise its discretion under s 27(2)©. The section does not in any way fetter the exercise of the court's discretion, although the discretion must be exercised in the light of the objective of Part II of the Act set out in s 17(1) and of the general principle set out in s 17(3). In exercising the discretion in any particular case, I agree that the court must have in mind the general principles referred to by Lord Woolf. There is a spectrum of different circumstances which may arise so that it is difficult to lay down precise guidelines. Cases will vary greatly. For example, in a case where the proposed advocate is holding himself out as providing advocacy services, whether for reward or not, the court will only make an order under s 27(2)© in exceptional circumstances: D v S (Rights of Audience) [1997] 1 FLR 724. On the other hand, where the proposed advocate is a member of the litigant's family, the position is likely to be very different, although, as this case shows, even in such cases the circumstances may vary widely.

There is, in my judgment, no warrant for holding that in such cases an order should only be made in exceptional circumstances. To my mind there is nothing in any of the decisions to which we were referred, including D v S (Rights of Audience) [1997] 1 FLR 724, which requires us so to hold. All will depend upon the circumstances.

It follows that the judge did not ask the correct question and that it is for this court to exercise its own discretion. That discretion should only be exercised for good reason. The question is whether, having regard to the general principles set out by Lord Woolf, there is good reason on the facts of this case to permit Mr Keter to speak on behalf of the claimant at the forthcoming interlocutory applications and at any trial. To put it another way: is it just to permit him to do so?" Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 27(2)©

 

 

 

Courts and Legal Services Act 1990

Representation in certain county court cases. E+W

 

(1)The Lord Chancellor may [F1, with the concurrence of the Lord Chief Justice,] by order provide that there shall be no restriction on the persons who may exercise rights of audience, or rights to conduct litigation, in relation to proceedings in a county court of such a kind as may be specified in the order.

 

(2)The power to make an order may only be exercised in relation to proceedings—

 

(a)for the recovery of amounts due under contracts for the supply of goods or services;

 

(b)for the enforcement of any judgment or order of any court or the recovery of any sum due under any such judgment or order;

 

©on any application under the Consumer Credit Act 1974;

 

(d)in relation to domestic premises; or

 

[F2(e)dealt with as a small claim in accordance with rules of court,]

 

or any category (determined by reference to such criteria as the Lord Chancellor considers appropriate) of such proceedings.

[beyondhope]

Thank you sand dancer

[Sand-Dancer0191]

Welcome seem to be playing this game at the moment...and every time the ring breaks/ out flood the letters "yes your account was missold etc"/ Then the next time it breaks "your ppi complaint on this account is rejected"// KEEP these letters comming as it proves further your incompetance...

IS anyone else having the same letters?

[winston73]

Hello SD

 

Old post i know..... But did you get any joy from direct group, i'm about to go down that route.