mbna v twoman

[diddydicky]

it is unsatisfactory i agree- - but you would (IMO) take the date that the creditor is stating as it is HIS demands that you are answering to ( or claiming are incorrect- as the case may be)

[Guest]

it is unsatisfactory i agree- - but you would (IMO) take the date that the creditor is stating as it is HIS demands that you are answering to ( or claiming are incorrect- as the case may be)

 

even though statute regulates, and is therefore overriding?

[diddydicky]

well as an argument in litigation i doubt it would get you anywhere

 

if the statute says you must remedy BEFORE the date stated- and the creditors DN says you must comply BY the date stated then arguing that the "regulations" put the DN a day out = when the creditor was correct- would get you absolutely nowhere

 

if the creditors own words say remedy BEFORE the date specified (which means of course the day before) and thereby invalidates the 14 clear days- then there is still no argument since the creditor and the regulations are both saying the same thing

 

in short (with respect) i think you are making a "mountain" out of a molehill with this line of argument

 

the purpose of the DN is for the creditor to leave you (the unsophisticated debtor) in do doubt as to what is required of you

 

i suggest that if a debtor then started arguing "the toss" between what the Creditor says and what the regulations say- then the judge will form the opinion that in this case the debtor was more than savvy enough not to have been left in any doubt as to what the creditor was demanding in theh DN - and was merely seeking to avoid the debt on a technicality. (IMO)

 

in other words the debtor would, i suspect have hoisted himself by his own petard

Edited August 8, 2010 by diddydicky

[Guest]

i know what you mean. am keen to get opinions on things. (although the cr statement wld then 'override' statute!)

what then iyo, if, together with this 'ambiguity', the dn also doesn't include a statement as per schedule 2 10a of the 1983 regs, and also doesn't comply with para 5b of the regs?

[diddydicky]

the more it has wrong with it the better the chance of showing it to be invalid but usually these things on their own may well be considered de minimus

[Guest]

the more it has wrong with it the better the chance of showing it to be invalid but usually these things on their own may well be considered de minimus

 

thanks.

n.b. also s 88 1 b states that the dn must specify '..the date before which that action is to be taken.' s88 2 states cr 'shall not take action.....before the date specified...' And, s89 cca states that 'if before the date specified....'

[twoman]

Ok,

Received SAR information.

Load of papers with expenditure,conversations etc.

No DN enclosed although they have issued one and couple of PPI payments and £25.00 late payment fees adds upto a couple of hundred pounds.

The agreement is the same as in a previous post.

Don't really know what to do now i've had the info!

Any advice on what i need to look for and what my reponse should be.

[Dotty50]

Hi twoman,

 

Have a read through the PPI forum to see how to start a claim for that and also claim your late charges too, you can add contractual interest from the date it was charged, not that they always pay back CI, but always best to ask and see what they come back with.

 

I have a Capital 1 thread which will give you some info into claiming, it's not up to date at the moment but you should be able to get the gist of what to do.

 

DN's are not sent with a SAR as they are automated letters but it should show when it was issued on the logs.

[twoman]

Hi All,

Had a call today,unknown number,stating they are a company called Approvals (i think) and phoning on behalf of one of their partners........MBNA......asked who they are etc and what's it about.They wanted me togo through security questions as they couldn't continue unless i did...i said "c u later" ...phone down.

Does anybody have any idea who these are?

[dx100uk]

give us the number i think i know them

 

dx

[twoman]

Hi DX,

The number was witheld,unknown number that's why i answered.

[Dotty50]

Only heard of Aplins connected with MBNA.

[dx100uk]

thats who i was thinking dotty

but couldn.t remember the exact name

 

dx

[Dotty50]

Hi DX,

The number was witheld,unknown number that's why i answered.

 

The thing is twoman, with witheld numbers or private caller, they rely on your curiosity! DON'T let it get the better of you, if it is a genuine caller, they will leave a message and you can call back.

[twoman]

Hi Caggers...again,

Received this from MBNA after i requested some information missing from August 2000 to Dec 2003.

It has taken them nearly 5 months to send this letter so i guess they are re-loading to have another go at me now.

 

Any thoughts.

[minmoo]

Hi twowoman, i have just read your thread and you mentioned 'Approvals'. MBNA have been trying to get me to take out a loan with them recently. They claim to be very close to them and the loans are unsecured. Very odd, check out my thread. In my case they cant supply a cca currently which is why i think they want me to take out a loan with a nice shiny new agreement. I might be wrong though. I can find nothing else about this approvals on the net though.

[Chazzyboy]

subbing