RBS Mint Loan - Court Action Started & Dodgy DN issues

[Pumpkinhead]

Hi Everyone

I'm trying to locate a quote by Roy Goode (Commercial Law) - does anyone have access to a copy who could help me, or could point me to an online resource.

[car2403]

Hi Everyone

I'm trying to locate a quote by Roy Goode (Commercial Law) - does anyone have access to a copy who could help me, or could point me to an online resource.

 

Which quote?

[Pumpkinhead]

Which quote?

 

I have the quote but want to be able to reference it by page number for example. I don't want to run the risk of any unwanted eyes seeing it though.

[Undercover-Elsa]

Have you tried Google Books,PH? Sometimes you can come up lucky on there. search for either the title / author + a distinctive word in the quote, or title/author then search within the book for the full quote.

Worked for me searching for refs to "repudiation"

 

Elsa x

[gh2008]

I have the quote but want to be able to reference it by page number for example. I don't want to run the risk of any unwanted eyes seeing it though.

 

If you PM the quote to one of use I am sure we can find it - if it's to keep it away from guests, attach the quote to a post as a pdf - it is then not available to guests or, as I said PM it

 

OR if you know someone at Uni then ask them to find it for you on LexisNexis

[gh2008]

Interesting quote - but even key sentences of it do not appear anywhere on the web except on this site .....

 

That is pretty unusual in itself.

Unless someone on here has access to LexisNexis you could go and ask on 'that other site' (LB) for help as I know there are posters on there with access

[Pumpkinhead]

I'll try the other place.

[gh2008]

Interesting quote - but even key sentences of it do not appear anywhere on the web except on this site .....

 

That is pretty unusual in itself.

Unless someone on here has access to LexisNexis you could go and ask on 'that other site' (LB) for help as I know there are posters on there with access

 

I do have these which may be handy

Goode - VIII_Service_of_documents.pdf

Goode - Default_Notices.pdf

[Pumpkinhead]

I do have these which may be handy

Thanks - I've picked these up already. Will see if LB comes up with anything.

[Pumpkinhead]

My, my, those guests get everywhere!

[car2403]

Remember, of course, though, that Goode's copyright shouldn't be infringed on (or off) the forum please

[Pumpkinhead]

of course!

[Pumpkinhead]

Wondered if PT2537 or anyone else out there has online access to Goode?

[emandcole]

PM sent

[Undercover-Elsa]

Good luck with that PH..I've been hunting around too with no success (although there are some copies of his books on Ebay for about £50!)

 

Elsa x

[Pumpkinhead]

Well judgement has gone against me today. I am disappointed but not surprised. The DJ was very nice and treated me kindly and said I had fought a valiant battle and that my documents were all in excellent order. In his opinion "the Defendant's fatal flaw was to accept the repudiation of contract" meaning that I still owe the remaining balance. I do have right of appeal of course and I am also considering bringing a counter claim for damages caused by the repudiation. I shall take legal advice on that point. The DJ agreed the DN was a travesty. When I get the full judgement I will consider posting it up. He felt my argument was attractive but the fact I accepted the rescission in writing brought matters outside the CCA and into normal laws relating to debt.

[gh2008]

But s170 prevents common law remedies applying unless expressly set out within the Act for a breach of the Act. Indeed we were taken to Appeal by a creditor where we won restitution of all monies paid under the doctrine of mistake, that the monies paid under an unenforceable agreement would not have been paid if the client was aware of the unenforceability. The Appeal court straight away found that the opponents were right that s170 precluded our remedy

 

Also, we have a High Court Judgment which says a bad notice can be remedied and no enforcement can occur on the back of a bad notice

 

Cool :8 I knew this had been dealt with at length just couldn't put my finger on it.

 

Hopefully PH can get the advice and support of a crack team of Pros she requires to see another creditor off at Appeal

 

Obviously once the details of the Judgment are known etc

[gh2008]

AND, if the other side were represented by Counsel they should have pointed that out .......

[pt2537]

Yes, a breach of said act and, that breach (if any breach has ocurred)is a matter for the Regulator - the OFT.

 

What about a material breach of the contract? What does s170 say about that? Answer = Nothing.

 

The said act cannot prevent a civil remedy being elected by the innocent party to the contract, said act, s170 thereof, can only makes for no civil remedy available to the innocent party for any breach of said act.

 

Pumpkinhead, the DJ sitting on your case has made an error and he also contradicts himself in respect of your action bringing the matter outside of the CCA and under the rules of common law.

 

Kind Regards

 

The Mould

Well the trouble is Mouldy, you and a few others scattered over these forums seem to belive what you say, however, i see no judgments in your favour,

 

However, when i look at my files, i see Arrow Global vs Devlin which went to appeal, i see Harrison vs Link Financial, and of course the case of R vs Kettering Magistrates Court exparte the MIB all of which seem to take me to the conclusion i reach.

 

So, please provide me with a case authority which centres on these issues, as it seems you must have one at least surely?

[pt2537]

Well the trouble is Mouldy, you and a few others scattered over these forums seem to belive what you say, however, i see no judgments in your favour,

 

However, when i look at my files, i see Arrow Global vs Devlin which went to appeal, i see Harrison vs Link Financial, and of course the case of R vs Kettering Magistrates Court exparte the MIB all of which seem to take me to the conclusion i reach.

 

So, please provide me with a case authority which centres on these issues, as it seems you must have one at least surely?

oh and of course,

 

Tritel, Chitty, Goode, Lloyd and Guest

 

cant seem to find something in any of them that supports your view really

[Peterbard]

Well judgement has gone against me today. I am disappointed but not surprised. The DJ was very nice and treated me kindly and said I had fought a valiant battle and that my documents were all in excellent order. In his opinion "the Defendant's fatal flaw was to accept the repudiation of contract" meaning that I still owe the remaining balance. I do have right of appeal of course and I am also considering bringing a counter claim for damages caused by the repudiation. I shall take legal advice on that point. The DJ agreed the DN was a travesty. When I get the full judgement I will consider posting it up. He felt my argument was attractive but the fact I accepted the rescission in writing brought matters outside the CCA and into normal laws relating to debt.

 

HI

I take this to mean that by accepting the temination you actually initiated the termiantion of contract, as the default termination could not have occured due to the faulty DN.

So your action allowed the court to enforce, if you hadnt the court would probably have ruled the default was not in order and discontinued, the creditor would have had to have reissued and you would have been given more breathing space.

What numbsky advised you to accept the termination?

Peter

[Bigdebtor]

GH

 

An excellent analysis (imho) - but this is applying logic and common sense - perhaps that is why the opposite outcome won out?

 

BD

[Peterbard]

Interestingly, for those that have read the WS, the Claimant was not relying on their DN faulty as it was. They accepted it was faulty and accepted they terminated without the benefit of S87

 

They then argued that whether they comply with S87 or not they still have Common Law right to the repayment of the debt.

 

The Defendant argued that they did not

 

The Claimant won and therefore as far as this DJ is concerned there is no need for a DN at all as the Creditor can terminate at any time and at the time of termination has the full rights to immediate repayment of the balance outstanding.

No need for S87 notice

No need for S99 notice

 

Just terminate & make the demand.

 

And, as far as explicitly accepting termination, as PH was unable to pay she would have implicitly accepted by her actions anyway

 

Well, that's how I see THIS case, so jmho

 

Why would you think that the none action of the debtor would constitute an acception?

 

The DJ dint think so anyway

[skidrow]

ah, so a conflict between common law and statute law! but as it was on the creditors behalf common law won over statute law

 

whereas if the boot were on the other foot- the judge would have found that statute law won over common law!

 

that seems to be the gist of how it works. is that right?

[car2403]

ah, so a conflict between common law and statute law! but as it was on the creditors behalf common law won over statute law

 

whereas if the boot were on the other foot- the judge would have found that statute law won over common law!

 

that seems to be the gist of how it works. is that right?

 

This is why there's talk of appeals, as no, that isn't right, although yes, it is the way that it seems to work.

 

I don't blame them, really, as Judges see vexatious defences against justified claims - it's a struggle to win them over, as these companies "surely aren't wrong", when this individual defendant can't possibly be "right about them".

 

Just a shame we don't have any Judges on CAG, in'nit?! (Or do we? Lol)