Cap1 & CCA return

[tifo]

Getting a CCJ overturned because you didn't ask for a copy of the agreement, or query it, is perversed. You'll have to ask for a copy, see if it is enforceable and then maybe, with a fair wind behind you and a helpful judge, they won't throw it out immediately and you may be able to get the courts to look at it.

 

Let's say you ask for a set aside and this is allowed (court don't care, you're paying). The main thing being asked here is what if they can't show an executed agreement if the case goes to a hearing? Would a (kind) judge overturn the CCJ or is the normal routine that nothing can be done now matey, so off you go .... and pay them their costs for this silly idea you had?

[car2403]

Getting a CCJ overturned because you didn't ask for a copy of the agreement, or query it, is perversed. You'll have to ask for a copy, see if it is enforceable and then maybe, with a fair wind behind you and a helpful judge, they won't throw it out immediately and you may be able to get the courts to look at it.

 

If you can show the agreement should never have been enforced, (missing agreement, no prescribed terms, etc) that has to be a reason for asking for Judgment to be set aside, IMHO.

 

It depends how the original CCJ came about, I suppose, as to how successful that would be - if the original Judgment was Judgment by Default, the existance of an agreement would have never been tested, so more likely. Less likely if it's gone to Judgment by Admission.

[paulwlton]

Creditors usually run the judgment account independent of the agreement, once the debtor as paid the judgment in full the creditor then takes the debtor back to court, and sues for the interest. If there is no signed agreement witch includes contractual entitlement then i can't see a court granting this if challenged. Unfortunately debtors are not aware of this and creditors know too well, all they produce is statements showing the accrual of interest, the creditor and debtor therefore settle out of court with a compromise.

[Having_A_Knightmare]

I am going to draft a reply to OFT and get some clarification on this matter.

 

They have also conveniently forgot to mention about the original terms and conditions.

 

Any input for the letter would be great.

 

HAK

[gaz2006]

CreditCardKiller is still watching this thread though.

 

Maybe we should all take the fact that threats of litigation get people nowhere, especially as after a little bit of delving most 'services' such as this may not have the legal footing (i.e. regulatory clearance) they may well require.

 

The fact still remains that the registration of the CCK trademark predates all posts on this site by nearly 3 years and that litigation hadn't concluded until this year. Things like that do lead me to believe that the business plan was present long before any legal ruling and that the 'holy grail' of court rulings came by way of an accident. I can't remember how many charging orders it was, was it 2 or 3? We're there other DCA's involved?

 

At the end of the day, if you come out of hiding (and with the help of information gleaned from this and other sites) stating you have found the elixir of life and that you are intending to charge for this, is anyone surprised at the response you get? I wouldn't be.

 

I thought you couldn't be an IFA if you had a CCJ?

 

No IFAS can have CCJs and still practice if there are good reasons for them theya re regulated by FSA just because you have a ccj or a default doesnt mean you dont do your job well many people on here have defaults or ccjs because of bank charges and credit card debts etc does that mean they cant be in finace or their job no it doesnt . i think youve given Basil a hard time unduly without all the facts he might have done a discount for cag members etc after all i fhe has a key to help others why cant he make money ?

[gizmo111]

No IFAS can have CCJs and still practice if there are good reasons for them theya re regulated by FSA just because you have a ccj or a default doesnt mean you dont do your job well many people on here have defaults or ccjs because of bank charges and credit card debts etc does that mean they cant be in finace or their job no it doesnt . i think youve given Basil a hard time unduly without all the facts he might have done a discount for cag members etc after all i fhe has a key to help others why cant he make money ?

 

I disagree that the person concerned has been given a hard time. he came to CAG and posted links to a commercial site, which is against site rules, promoting a service that is against the ethos in which CAG was created, and is not supportive of the community spirit of which CAG is so proud. The advice and support here is intended to empower people to take back control of their financial affairs, whilst learning and sharing the knowledge gained with others. It is because of this that we have seen so many successes in taking on the financial institutions, which is something not many of us would have considered doing alone 2 years ago. CAG has provided the inspiration for 000's of people to fight back and 'reclaim the right' for free.

If someone came on to the site and posted that they had the secret to getting back your charges for a large fee up front and was subsequently challenged, would that person be considered as unfairly treated?

[gaz2006]

I disagree that the person concerned has been given a hard time. he came to CAG and posted links to a commercial site, which is against site rules, promoting a service that is against the ethos in which CAG was created, and is not supportive of the community spirit of which CAG is so proud. The advice and support here is intended to empower people to take back control of their financial affairs, whilst learning and sharing the knowledge gained with others. It is because of this that we have seen so many successes in taking on the financial institutions, which is something not many of us would have considered doing alone 2 years ago. CAG has provided the inspiration for 000's of people to fight back and 'reclaim the right' for free.

If someone came on to the site and posted that they had the secret to getting back your charges for a large fee up front and was subsequently challenged, would that person be considered as unfairly treated?

 

Gizmo I didnt actuiually see him promoting his service on this site perhaps I missed him doing so yes hes open to challenges s etc but some things that were said about him when people dont have all the facts was wrong he is innocent until proven guilty yes he can challenged but if its true he has battled them for 3 years why should he give info away for free if hes battled for 3 years he must have suffered too like all of us just because your a moderator that doenst mean to say your always right nor me either but if hes marketing his site he shouldnt I agree but some of the accusations were wrong he was being interrogated like the gestapo which was wrong in my opinion . I dont know him never met him but people were saying he cant do that cant do this etc when they dont know the facts and saying he cant be an IFa because he has a CCJ is totally wrong as is saying he cant be an iFa if he is a mortgage adviser only people make comments sometimes without thinking and whilst we all would like to know the case he won etc we wont get the info by making accusations that werent true and comments that werent just Regards Gaz

[postggj]

ime asking this quick question as the thread is cca and sort of relevent

 

does a finance company under the cca 1974 have to send regular statements of accounts, or at least once a year

if not does this invalidate a cca

[gizmo111]

I absolutely agree that no one should be accused of anything they are not guilty of. Any posts/discussions of this kind will be and have been removed/edited.

 

I have no problem with anyone offering a personal claims service for financial rewards, just CAG is not the place to market and promote it, whatever the history.

[ian1969uk]

i think youve given Basil a hard time unduly without all the facts he might have done a discount for cag members etc after all i fhe has a key to help others why cant he make money ?

 

You've got to be kidding, right?

 

There are many people here and on other sites that have given absolutely huge amounts of time to research the issues and help other people. Do they ask for money for that? No they don't!

 

I remember one user getting banned for asking someone they were helping to pay the postage to post a court bundle. This was considered asking for payment (it wasn't so imo).

 

However, the point is that this and the other consumer sites are all about helping people in trouble because it's the right thing to do, not because they are getting paid for it.

 

To come on and advertise a service (without actually showing any real evidence that they could do what they said they could do) is just wrong, plain and simple.

[FANTASY CHARGES]

I am going to draft a reply to OFT and get some clarification on this matter.

 

They have also conveniently forgot to mention about the original terms and conditions.

 

Any input for the letter would be great.

 

HAK

 

 

HAK

 

this link is aimed to give you an insight into the "exactness of usage of words" hope it is of use...

 

In the end Mr. Hapgood's argument had to be that by enacting section 187(1) Parliament had cut down what would otherwise be encompassed by the broad wording of section 12(b). However, we are satisfied that the expression "treated as" was used to extend, rather than restrict, the scope of that section; in other words, we accept that it was part of a provision intended to prevent avoidance of its provisions. We think that the natural meaning of those words is to bring within the scope of section 12(b) arrangements that might otherwise fall outside it. If sections 187(1) and (2) had been intended to define the only kind of arrangements that were capable of falling within section 12(b) we think that the draftsman would have used the word "is" rather than the expression "shall be treated as". Our conclusion is reinforced by the evidence elsewhere in the Act that the draftsman has been careful and precise in his choice of language: for example, where "means" is intended the statute says "means", and where "includes" is meant it says "includes" (see the definitions in section 189). We therefore reject Mr. Hapgood's argument and, like the judge, take comfort from the fact that many distinguished commentators on the Act support that view: see, for example, Goode, Consumer Credit Law and Practice at Information Commissioner 25.63(a) and Information Commissioner 33.148; Guest and Lloyd, Encyclopaedia of Consumer Credit Law pages 2074/2; 2074/6; Brindle and Cox, Law of Bank Payments 3rd ed: paragraphs 4-066, 5-027 and 5-029.

 

similarily "true copy" means "true copy"

 

Court of Appeal Judgment

 

 

 

Documentary evidence

The original document is referred to as primary evidence for example the original

As opposed to secondary evidence for example a copy of the original.

The second

[car2403]

ime asking this quick question as the thread is cca and sort of relevent

 

does a finance company under the cca 1974 have to send regular statements of accounts, or at least once a year

if not does this invalidate a cca

 

Depends when the agreement was executed and which Act it's regulated by;

 

CCA 1974 - no need to send regular statements

 

CCA 2006 - requirement to send statements regularly, or the agreement becomes unenforceable until the default is remedied, (much like a s.77/s.78 failure to supply documents, except that they can't add interest for the period they are in default of sending statements) under s.6A CCA 2006

[gaz2006]

I absolutely agree that no one should be accused of anything they are not guilty of. Any posts/discussions of this kind will be and have been removed/edited.

 

I have no problem with anyone offering a personal claims service for financial rewards, just CAG is not the place to market and promote it, whatever the history.

 

Yes I agree but as far as I saw he was answering questions raised by members on what he did he wasnt saying look pay me this money and I will wipe our cards clean heres the site put your payment details here !!!!

[gaz2006]

You've got to be kidding, right?

 

There are many people here and on other sites that have given absolutely huge amounts of time to research the issues and help other people. Do they ask for money for that? No they don't!

 

I remember one user getting banned for asking someone they were helping to pay the postage to post a court bundle. This was considered asking for payment (it wasn't so imo).

 

However, the point is that this and the other consumer sites are all about helping people in trouble because it's the right thing to do, not because they are getting paid for it.

 

To come on and advertise a service (without actually showing any real evidence that they could do what they said they could do) is just wrong, plain and simple.

 

 

Understand your point however great it would be for him to give away the court details for free to us he has seen an opportunity to make money for it and has taken it how many of us honestly would hold their hands up and say they would not have done the same thing ? I have asked questiosn here and got good advice and have given advice freeley too and yes I never ask for payment etc and have made a donation when Im successful with claim backs how many people perhaps take advice get the money and dont make a donation isnt that wrong too ?

[paulwlton]

Whilst many CAG members genuinely want to help each other for free, there will be some using the knowledge they've gained for personal gain. I don't think this is a bad thing as long has the fees they charge are reasonable. CCKs aint imo.

[FANTASY CHARGES]

Whilst many CAG members genuinely want to help each other for free there will be some using the knowledge they've gained for personal gain. I don't think this is a bad thing as long has the fees they charge are reasonable. CCKs aint imo.

 

just an idea as think they "barter" or something similar in the USA

 

REMEMBER we mentioned that you could set yourself up as a DCA for £500

you buy the "defective" debt from OC for say 10% face having charged the debtor 20% ???

[pford]

Whilst many CAG members genuinely want to help each other for free, there will be some using the knowledge they've gained for personal gain. I don't think this is a bad thing as long has the fees they charge are reasonable. CCKs aint imo.

 

totaly agree

 

But then you get drawn into to it you charged me for this info (reasonable cost) but i still lost?

[gaz2006]

Whilst many CAG members genuinely want to help each other for free, there will be some using the knowledge they've gained for personal gain. I don't think this is a bad thing as long has the fees they charge are reasonable. CCKs aint imo.

 

yes agree partly £50 fee is reasonable but 20% upfront on a debt that is high especially as that person may be struggling hence he needs help he has to beg steal or borrow the 20% to pay the fee and no 100% guarantee he will win if he does he still has 20% to pay back but thats better than 100% !!!

[BigBadCAGBagger]

Received a letter from a sols working on behalf of a DCA appointed by Cap1. Will these people ever learn about the consequences of an improperly issued default notice? Will they ever learn about non-compliance of a s78 request? Will they ever listen about their errors with regards to issuing notices of arrears under the 2006 act? Will they ever actually get a grasp of the legislation?

 

Take me to court I say, issue an N1 I say, line up and get justice dispensed I say. Expect a full and immediate defence, expect a claim for damages too and fully expect me to not rest until the default notice is removed.

[un1boy]

Received a letter from a sols working on behalf of a DCA appointed by Cap1. Will these people ever learn about the consequences of an improperly issued default notice? Will they ever learn about non-compliance of a s78 request? Will they ever listen about their errors with regards to issuing notices of arrears under the 2006 act? Will they ever actually get a grasp of the legislation?

 

Take me to court I say, issue an N1 I say, line up and get justice dispensed I say. Expect a full and immediate defence, expect a claim for damages too and fully expect me to not rest until the default notice is removed.

 

Only when the OFT start writing to them saying that their credit licenses are being reviewed will the banks and DCAs actually start playing fair - because they don't get sorted by the regulators, they keep doing what they are doing!

 

Scandalous I say!

[tifo]

Only when the OFT start writing to them saying that their credit licenses are being reviewed will the banks and DCAs actually start playing fair - because they don't get sorted by the regulators, they keep doing what they are doing!

 

As if that's gonna happen !!!

[un1boy]

I know, I know - tell me about it!

[BigBadCAGBagger]

Without having to read back through this thread again, what is the current understanding of what is acceptable with regards to contents of a s78 request? Lets not get hung up on original vs current T&C's here, I'm talking about the agreement itself. Specifically for claims under the SI 1983/1553 ?

[car2403]

Without having to read back through this thread again, what is the current understanding of what is acceptable with regards to contents of a s78 request? Lets not get hung up on original vs current T&C's here, I'm talking about the agreement itself. Specifically for claims under the SI 1983/1553 ?

 

They have to provide everything outlined in s.78.

[BigBadCAGBagger]

Oh, and so the SI is irrelevant?

 

I'm serious here, I've had CCP's misquote the SI and I was wondering what the borg on this thread thought?