Jump to content


MONTY

MONTY v CREATION FINANCE

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3092 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

evening monty

I am a cagger, just reading out of interest, did you know that your personal details can be seen on your photobook album, is this intentional or is it a computer glitch or some other thing, sorry I'm not that tech savvy, good luck Tam65

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The crux of their claim is that they can prove I have had the benefits of the card (they call it a 'creditcard' in their WS and a 'storecard' in other documents), therefore the production of a true copy of an agreement, DN and NoA is not required. This psition is suppoted by recent case precedent.

 

 

I'd be interested in reading the case law relied upon. Past case law has shown that having the benefit of any agreement is an entirely different matter to showing how that renders the debtor liable to return those sums and how such a return was to be orchestrated. Key thing therefore is not to deny the debt but to question the nature and documentation of how that debt was granted and how you were to pay it back under the CCA, not some ill founded moral argument based on attempts to secure a sympathy judgment.

 

It's perfectly simple but creditors seem to be finally and very slowly realising that actually the law does apply to them, in the meantime they'll try any tack to distract an informed judge as to your rights and to their lawful obligations. I'll have a dig about, might have some info to help you with this.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just to update - the hearing was adjourned. While I await another date to be scheduled there have be some significant events with other Caggers. The following link is particularly relevant to my case and I will be using it on the day:

 

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/...e/2011/B3.html

 

Of note, is the DJ's scathing comments re DCA tactics

 

Good evening Tom

 

Why was it adjourned Monty?


 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dimond v Lovell 2000

 

“Parliament intended that if a consumer credit agreement was improperly executed, then subject to the enforcement powers of the court, the debtor should not have to pay. This meant that Parliament contemplated that he might be enriched and I do not see how it is open to the court to say that this consequence is unjust and should be reversed by a remedy at common law: “

 

If the judge insists that as you had the money you should pay for it remind him/her politely that this case is binding on their court. If they persist and ignore you make sure you ask that they make clear reference to rejecting Dimond v Lovell so you can appeal afterwards.

 

Just make sure the court knows that you are merely asking the court to grant you your rights under the CCA.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dimond v Lovell 2000

 

“Parliament intended that if a consumer credit agreement was improperly executed, then subject to the enforcement powers of the court, the debtor should not have to pay. This meant that Parliament contemplated that he might be enriched and I do not see how it is open to the court to say that this consequence is unjust and should be reversed by a remedy at common law: “

 

If the judge insists that as you had the money you should pay for it remind him/her politely that this case is binding on their court. If they persist and ignore you make sure you ask that they make clear reference to rejecting Dimond v Lovell so you can appeal afterwards.

 

Just make sure the court knows that you are merely asking the court to grant you your rights under the CCA.

 

Good advice - thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

72. Undoubtedly, as illustrated by the facts of the present case, section 127(3) may be drastic, even harsh, in its adverse consequences for a lender. He loses all his rights under the agreement, including his rights to any security which has been lodged. Conversely, the borrower acquires what can only be described as a windfall. He keeps the money and recovers his security. These consequences apply just as much where the lender was acting in good faith throughout and the error was due to a mistaken reading of the complex statutory requirements as in cases of deliberate non-compliance. These consequences also apply where, as in the present case, the borrower suffered no prejudice as a result of the non-compliance as they do where the borrower was misled. Parliament was painting here with a broad brush.

 

More here, http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200203/ldjudgmt/jd030710/will-1.htm heavy reading but there are a few paras of note

 

Also bear in mind that case law is NOT considered new evidence so you can bring up new pieces supporting your case


If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Monty, have alerted site team, but you might want to try and contact gh2008, emandcole or foolishgirl who might be able to help.


Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy -

HERE

2: Take back control of your finances -

Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors?

Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt

Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated -

Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Litigation privilege notice

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-2913164.html

This thread exists exclusively to assist me in preparing litigation against another party. As such it is almost certainly protected by litigation privilege.

 

The legal requirements for claiming litigation privilege are well established and are not in dispute. Communications between a solicitor or the client and a third party will be protected by litigation privilege where the communications are for the dominant purpose of obtaining legal advice in connection with, or conducting, litigation reasonably in prospect: Re Highgate Traders Limited [1984] BCLC 151.

 

Copyright Information: All information contained in this website, associated websites, and forum posts are copyright Reclaim The Right Ltd. If you wish to use the information on this site for publication elsewhere, then please email the administrators for permission.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-2814871.html

dad – post 777

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-2843442.html

Litigation privilege by dad – post 16

*************************************

It looks like this has happened before, you might want to contact shakespeare62 and see what else he did in respect of his creditor printing off/using information from his thread.


Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy -

HERE

2: Take back control of your finances -

Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors?

Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt

Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated -

Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...