Cap1 & CCA return

[Peterbard]

for anyone interested on the Rankine case,

 

here is what Goode Consumer Credit law and practice has to say on the subject.

 

 

Nice one PT

 

just what the doctor ordered

 

Peter

[Number6]

Hi Peter,

 

I am deleting all my reference as the professor has obviously made a mistake.

 

 

 

I think its probably best not to confuse peeps on here. I will let you know his explanation of that when the letter arrives. Until then I will delete the info.

 

I do not want to start world war 3:)

 

milly X

 

Milly

 

You're not starting any wars, you are doing good service. It's only by people like you digging out and publicising these nuggets of information that we are able to debate the issues. Debate, even 'robust' debate is not arguing, it's debate which is healthy, it's how we establish the truth of these matters.

 

The more opinions the better IMHO.

 

I would leave the information on here Milly, I really would.

[millymollymoo]

Hi

right one last time

 

I have sat through more court cases than i can remember where credit agreements have been used as evidence in fact i am involed in three as we speak. There as never been any question on this point becase the regulations make it perfectly clear look under section 2 (male sure you look at the unammended version )it gives a desciption of what has to be in the agreement in undespersed form.

 

Petr

 

 

 

All versions I have seen have amendments. For ease have you the unamended version?

 

 

 

milly X

[Peterbard]

All versions I have seen have amendments. For ease have you the unamended version?

 

 

 

milly X

 

Hi yes i do

 

It is not an opinion it is fact if it was an opinion i would say so.

 

I recomend you read here and work your way through.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/103383-agreement-enforceability.html

 

Peter

[underdog13]

Milly

 

You're not starting any wars, you are doing good service. It's only by people like you digging out and publicising these nuggets of information that we are able to debate the issues. Debate, even 'robust' debate is not arguing, it's debate which is healthy, it's how we establish the truth of these matters.

 

The more opinions the better IMHO.

 

I would leave the information on here Milly, I really would.

 

Completely agree:)

[pt2537]

Hi yes i do

 

It is not an opinion it is fact if it was an opinion i would say so.

 

I recomend you read here and work your way through.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/103383-agreement-enforceability.html

 

Peter

I have the unamended regs too and in electronic form, well scanned pdf images

[Peterbard]

I have the unamended regs too and in electronic form, well scanned pdf images

 

Well

la de daah

 

Mine have got gold edgings and theyr'e bigger

 

Peter

[pt2537]

Well

la de daah

 

Mine have got gold edgings and theyr'e bigger

 

Peter

yeah

 

 

but mine are signed by Alex Fisher so there:p

[Peterbard]

Don.t you just hate a show off.

 

By the way i watched all his games particullarily the one against spasky queens rook to bishop 4, classic.

 

Peter

[pt2537]

Don.t you just hate a show off.

 

By the way i watched all his games particullarily the one against spasky queens rook to bishop 4, classic.

 

Peter

:lol:

[millymollymoo]

I have the unamended regs too and in electronic form, well scanned pdf images

 

 

Hi PT could I ask you if I PM my email address.

 

Many thanks

 

Milly X

[millymollymoo]

Hi yes i do

 

It is not an opinion it is fact if it was an opinion i would say so.

 

I recomend you read here and work your way through.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/103383-agreement-enforceability.html

 

Peter

 

 

I'll be sure to pass your opinion on to Professor Macleod, he wrote the bloomin article not me. Maybe he may like to read it. i have read that thank you.

 

Cripes I only put on here something that was in a book of Law didnt expect all this for for a book I didnt write for goodness sake. I was confused because of what I read on here and that is why I emailed the author. Maybe it would be nice to share the relevant 1983 consumer agreement regulations as you have told me to read them.

Edited April 9, 2009 by millymollymoo

[basa48]

Maybe it would be nice to share the relevant 1983 consumer agreement regulations as you have told me to read them.

 

If it's the CC(Agreements)Regs 1983 your after, if you PM an email addy I'll send them (.pdf) 8)

[Number6]

Milly's point concerning the points raised by Pr Mcleod are certainly interesting.

 

Section 2(4) of the agreements regulations reads thus:

 

(4) Subject to paragraphs (5) and (9) below, the information, statements of the protection and remedies, signature and

separate boxes which this regulation requires documents embodying regulated consumer credit agreements to contain,

shall be set out in the order given by paragraphs (a) to (f) below under, where applicable, the headings specified below--

(a) the nature of the agreement as set out in paragraph 1 of Schedule 1 to these Regulations;

(b) the parties to the agreement as set out in paragraph 2 of Schedule 1 to these Regulations;

[© under the heading "Key Financial Information", the financial and related particulars set out in paragraphs 6 to

8B, 11 to 14 and 15 to 17 of Schedule 1 to these Regulations;]

(d) under the heading "Other Financial Information", the financial and related particulars set out in paragraphs 3 to 5,

9, 10, 14A and 18 to 19A of Schedule 1 to these regulations;

(e) under the heading "Key Information"--

(i) the information set out in paragraphs 20 to 24 of Schedule 1 to these Regulations; and

(ii) the statements of protection and remedies set out in Schedule 2 to these Regulations; and

 

(f) the signature box and, where applicable, the separate box required by paragraph (7)(b) below;

 

and such information, statements of protection and remedies, signature and separate boxes shall be shown together as a

whole and shall not be preceded by any information apart from trade names, logos or the reference number of the

agreement or interspersed with any other information or wording apart from subtotals of total amounts and cross

references to the terms of the agreement.

Now following my reading of this it clearly states that the "Key Financial Information" a) has to preceed the signature box and b) has to be shown together with the signature box.

 

I read that as meaning that the prescribed terms cannot come after the signature or be on the reverse of the agreement?

 

Pete

Edited April 9, 2009 by Number6

[paulwlton]

Attendended an hearing on Wednesday to challenge an application/agreement among other things. However, the Claimant failed to provide evidence for the hearing thus, I gave them the runaround, consequently the hearing was adjourned.

 

Unreasonable behaviour:

 

Requesting an adjounment at the last moment because the evidence to substatiate a case has not been prepared for a hearing (Lacey v Melford CC (1999) 12 CL 37)

 

Question: What form do i need to submit with my costs bill?

 

Paul

Edited April 10, 2009 by paulwlton

[foolishgirl]

Try this link Paul:

 

http://www.consumerforums.com/resources/templates-library/48-bank-templates/143-wasted-costs-order-.html

[paulwlton]

Try this link Paul:

 

http://www.consumerforums.com/resources/templates-library/48-bank-templates/143-wasted-costs-order-.html

 

Thanks Fg,

 

I know what form is needed now...252

 

Paul

[Viscount Stair]

I had a look at the template wasted costs order and I noticed that the commentary on it says:

 

If your defendant has supplied spurious part 18 requests or made part 36 offers even though your claim is clearly a small claim then tell the judge about it.

 

What makes their part 18 requests spurious and ours not? I ask out loud.

[conar686]

for anyone interested on the Rankine case,

 

here is what Goode Consumer Credit law and practice has to say on the subject.

 

PT, not as up to speed as you on these matters in plain English what is this saying to us?

[Viscount Stair]

I think a rough translation would be:

 

The Rankines were "at it" and deserved to lose but the judge got the law wrong.

[Peterbard]

Milly's point concerning the points raised by Pr Mcleod are certainly interesting.

 

Section 2(4) of the agreements regulations reads thus:

 

Now following my reading of this it clearly states that the "Key Financial Information" a) has to preceed the signature box and b) has to be shown together with the signature box.

 

I read that as meaning that the prescribed terms cannot come after the signature or be on the reverse of the agreement?

 

Pete

 

Ho Hum

 

This is the ammended regulations.

The key structure didnt esist until they were introduced in 2005

 

really this is a long dead debate tell you what, hang on go to my thread above and look up poting 178 it is a copy of the OFT guide to what should be on an agreement scrol down to signatures then pleas lets get on to a more current topic

 

Peter

[Peterbard]

Bloody Cheek

 

Just been looking at the martin Lewis forum and they have copied half of my posts off the agreement thread on there, no acknowledgement nothing good mind to sue.

 

Peter

[AnimalMagic]

Hope they've corrected the spelling and punctuation

[Peterbard]

Hope they've corrected the spelling and punctuation

 

 

Meowww

 

My writen english has never been what you would call good but the content is usually accurate.

 

Peter

[B3rty]

Peter

 

I am dyslexic myself and can spot the signs a mile off, I write in word-spell check then cut and paste which helps me get it right however...keep up the good work its much appreciated.

 

For those ignorant to the subject heres a list that includes Einstien, Edision & Churchill.

 

Famous People with the Gift of Dyslexia