Harrison vs Link Financial Limited- High Court judgment

[pt2537]

Is finally here http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Mercantile/2011/B3.html

 

Enjoy

 

any questions please ask away and i will try and answer them

[pt2537]

difficult to advise really.

 

Id say if the judge erred then you ought to have appealed the decision.

 

I think this case makes things clearer now

[pt2537]

Unfortunate as appeals can become a costly matter

 

Were there any other issues other than the default notice? or was that the only complaint

[pt2537]

Happy Birthday Paul.... x

LOL thanks

 

I try to forget that its my birthday as much as possible as my kids tell me im old all the time lol

[pt2537]

oh lordy, he did not just gloss over the issue, there was a large section of the judgment that deals with the default with his conclusion in para 75

[pt2537]

no no no no no it wasnt the 18 calls, that gave rise to torture

 

it was the other calls not alluded to, that were the real problem

[pt2537]

I just hope people start raising the unfair conduct of these DCAs in their defences

 

The Harrison judgment binds the lower courts, so ought to be given respect by the District Judges

[pt2537]

I am interested in that fact that in Harrison an order was sought that he was "not liable for any sum standing to his debit under the agreement" The Judgment implies that the Claimant also sought relief under S140(b)

 

The DJ does not seem to explicitly rule on either of those matters.

 

He does deny the counterclaim for the balance but does not say that following service, even now, of a compliant DN a further claim would not be entertained.

 

Just interested as to whether this agreement is now deemed terminated and if so then when and by whom was it terminated?

Was the agreement declared as being irredeemably unenforceable?

 

I did notice that the DN 'issue' was not given "great weight"

 

 

 

In fact more weight was given to the fact that the debtor just stopped payments

The judges conclusions drew likenesses between the powers under 127(1)&(2) and section 140.

 

Therefore he used his powers to refuse the application for an enforcement order ( made in written closing submissions) he dismissed the Counterclaim, and he made an order pursuant to s142 which now declares no further enforcement can occur.

 

HTH

[pt2537]

We had the envelope which the Claimant said the notice arrived in, i made enquiries using the envelope and was able to ascertain the date the notice entered the postal system, the time, the destination, the location from where it came etc and was able to show on balance that the envelope was the correct one and therefore i was able to show that the notice wasnt sent as MBNA said

[pt2537]

The problem i have is that i am bound by a confidentiality agreement which i cannot disclose the information which came to my possession

 

However, you need the Royal Mail and there ought to be a orange bar code style item on the envelope , this is the key and all i can say on the subject

[pt2537]

the code is commercially sensitive to the Royal mail

 

Only they can decipher it and it would need to go through their legal department, Mr Harrison had tried to get them to assist but they refused, only when they were asked during proceedings did they agree to help

 

ive said more than i should have already

[pt2537]

no

 

because it wasn't UK mail

[pt2537]

To elaborate, MBNA said it was deffo UKMail but we had the envelope so could show the postal method was not ukmail but an inferior postal service

[pt2537]

UK mails own terms and conditions set out that they do not guarantee 2 day delivery due to the reliance on the Royal mail

 

Google UKMail and you will find them

 

or look here http://www.ukmail.biz/assets/ukmail_DSA_tcsept09.pdf

[pt2537]

you will need to speak to Royal mail legal department

 

i cannot say anymore sorry,