Brandon Case

[maxedout]

Google it. Defective DN.

[Basil Fawlty]

Google it. Defective DN.

 

Thanks! Hope its a winner, I've more than one of those!

 

BF

[the_shadow]

Nooooo.....I think it sounds promising myself! This is an appeal. There is obviously some flaws in the last judgement if it has to be thought about in depth this time. If Brandon had no chance of winning the appeal then I feel the judge would have made his judgement yesterday IMO.

SB

 

Thats not always the case, trials may be complex or the sheer number of submissions by both sides render the time alloted not enough for the judge to make the decision, both arguments have been put forward but he/she may still need to read the relevant documents or look at the quoted case law in depth and so they will usually reserve the judgement for a number of months before letting both side know the outcome. Some you win, some you lose

 

Fingers crossed for Mr B

 

S.

[timtimbo]

Subbing, as seems very similar to my situation

[Guest]

Is this case about unenforceability, or default notices, or something else?

 

BF

 

for reference, this was the brandon case that was the subject of the appeal hearing on 12/7.

 

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]28909[/ATTACH]

[frogdoctor]

I note that in clause 48 the judge is presumably directly refering to the Durkin case and states his treatment was "Clearly outrageous". Hopefully this will be reflected when it is presented to the Supreme court shortly

[smugorwhat]

COURT 8

Before LORD JUSTICE PILL

LORD JUSTICE GROSS and

SIR RICHARD BUXTON

Tuesday, 25 October, 2011

Not Before half-past 11

FOR JUDGMENT

APPEAL

From County Courts

FINAL DECISIONS

B2/2010/1463 Ian Karl Robert Brandon -v- American Express Services Europe Ltd. Appeal of Defendant from the order of His Honour Judge Roderick Denyer QC, dated 25th May 2010, filed 15th June 2010.

[Chipmeister]

Lawks! :@o

[Undercover-Elsa]

Fingers, toes, everything crossed for him xxxxxxxx

[May Fly]

Fingers, toes, everything crossed for him xxxxxxxx

 

yes indeed

[patrickq1]

yes good luck i am sure he will need it , the judges may look at it and think this one is trying to rock our comfortable boat , but lets hope not and the judges have a sense of justice and decide it is time the ****** banks had a good kik up the backside once and for all

patrickq1

[the_shadow]

Fingers, toes, everything crossed for him xxxxxxxx

 

Yep indeed.

 

S.

[patrickq1]

he seems a young judge so that is a good sign

 

 

 

His Hon Judge Denyer, QC's Biography

 

Forename(s) Roderick Lawrence Sex Male Decorations QC (1990) Date of Birth 1/3/1948

Surname DENYER Style His Hon Judge Denyer, QC Recreations cricket, 1960s pop music

 

His Hon Judge Denyer, QC's Professional Career

 

Career called to the Bar Inner Temple 1970 (bencher 1996); lectr in law Univ of Bristol 1971-73, practising barr 1973-2002, former head of chambers, recorder of the Crown Court 1990-2002, circuit judge (Wales & Chester Circuit) 2002- His Hon Judge Denyer, QC's Publicationsand Publications

 

Personal Injury Litigation and Children (1993, 2 edn 2002), various pubns in legal jls

[ScarletPimpernel]

Isn't Denyer J the judge whose order the appeal is against?

[mystery1]

Isn't Denyer J the judge whose order the appeal is against?

 

 

Yes and it was a summary judgement.

 

M1

[Fluffystuff]

Oh I do so hope we'll be smiling tomorrow!May the Gods be with you Mr Brandon.

[summerbreeze]

Will be thinking of Mr. B and hoping he gets the result he deserves.

[stone-broke]

Yes Elsa, I agree with you re fingers, toes and everything else crossed for Brandon!! I wish him well and hope it's one in the eye for the banks!!

[dadofholly]

Subbing with great interest -

 

I thought it was today - Wondered where Monday had gone - have heard mutterings. So fingers crossed

[DonkeyB]

Yup, mutterings are positive, but you never know...

[smugorwhat]

Great news. Well done Mr Brandon, we are indebted to you!

 

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2011/1187.html

Edited October 25, 2011 by smugorwhat
addition of link

[DonkeyB]

Excellent. Time to take stock of the implications...

[DonkeyB]

I think it mainly states that the judge cannot override statute.

[frettful38]

AHHHHHHHHHHH at long last some good news for him and us all............i need a cuppa now..............

[May Fly]

I must confess, after reading the judgement, I have no idea of the implications, other than that errors in service of a default notice are not minor and cannot be overlooked. I am guessing that after failing to serve a DN correctly, the lender cannot then go on to terminate the account.

 

It doesn't seem to have been argued that a contractual right to terminate undermines the CCA and is incompatible with the protection to the consumer it seeks to give.

 

It can be seen though., that AMEXs attitude was that errors in DNs don't matter because we can terminate any way we like.

 

It would seem that Mr Brandon is still liable for the debt as their illegal termination doesn't seem to ended their right to collect it.

 

I am puzzled though as to Amex counsel claiming that the agreement continued and it was only the card itself that was terminated.