Cap1 & CCA return

[InKogneeToh]

Mr Robert Udy is the name of Crap One's computer at Nottingham

 

Pull the uddy one!!!

[pmhcfc]

No forthcoming answer to post 4444 then..Comom InKogneeToh,,you're my hero here...surely you have the answer

[meagain]

Did your charges claim fail then?

 

I took a part payment, chased for the remainder, and they closed my account in retaliation. I have told them I am refusing payment because I refuse to acknowledge their right to leverage the overdraft in such a way.

[FANTASY CHARGES]

Hi all you clever people on this thread...Just one question if you forgive me from not wanting to wade through this entire thread again... When do the new regulations come in re DCA's being fined if a complaint is investigated, and which body is doing the fining ?

 

 

FAQs - timescale for consumer credit complaints

 

FAQs - consumer credit complaints

 

consultation paper - chapter 7, questions for consultation

 

 

ARE THESE ANY HELP ?

[angry cat]

I think that he was called 'Metal Micky'

 

Love AC

[Professor Fate]

Professor: Quick question.When you go to the Court of Justice which divison is your case being heard in.

 

Hi Term and everyone else. Apologies for the few days abscence, have work to do.

 

Its in the bankruptcy section, room 211 to set aside demands with the registrar. Despite what nonsense anyone writes on the stat demand the idiotic brief for Amex put High Court of Justice room 110. Should really be room 101.

 

Anyways, looks like I wont have to go as the morons respresenting Amex have withdrawn the stat demand without me even having to bother to go to court to set it aside.

 

I will post their reply and my letter I sent when I get a minute. You will particulary enjoy the very short letter from Amex solicitors in this matter.

[Professor Fate]

As an extention of the input from Professor Fate and the replies therto.

 

If this person is MIB it does matter because this thread is there to argue around the CCA & give advice to those who are sticking their toe in the water. The mention of Stautory Demand and the 'B' word is enough to put aload of people off, who wouldn't be, if they are just starting to establish their rights.

 

For those who may have been affected by this persons input, please please Google 'stautory demand', the information that you gain by that cursory inquiry and the instructions that you gain should be nough to put your mind at rest. Remeber a Stat demand is just as dangerous to the filer as it is to the defendant if the former hasn't got all his facts right.

 

As for clicky, to some extent this thread is, its IS very exclusive because the arguments have developed and are at times very technical, unless you take the time to read over 200 pages. However, that doesn't make it any the more less informative.

 

As reagrds PF, he obviously has a IP address it may be interesting to see how that compares with the other 'commando raids on our gang'.

 

Kind regards,

 

Mike

 

I have an IP address, I also have a home. I am not MIB, I dont see why you seem to think I am MIB?

 

Unfortunately I dont have loads of time to spend on this very informative forum because I have a full time business to run. If I sit here on the forum I just read and respond and dont get any work done.

 

SO please dont get paranoid about people because they dont live on here because I think it just put other people off from joining and making a contribution to help others in a similar circumstance to yourselves.

[Professor Fate]

Hi Professor

 

What part of London are you from? I hope you don't mind me asking afew (ahem) security questions before we go on.

 

You mention stat demand, and the high court. So, I take from that the inference you are in the profession?

 

I live in North London. I am not a lawyer.

 

I am in the electronics business, have set up and run a few companies in my time. Have had some good successes and failures over time.

 

Last 2 years my business has suffered due to the fact my asshole ex business partner raped the company for over six figures so I lost rather a lot of money.

 

Hence the need to know what I am doing vs my creditors as at the time I could barely afford to pay a mortgage and feed my family.

[pmhcfc]

FAQs - timescale for consumer credit complaints

 

FAQs - consumer credit complaints

 

consultation paper - chapter 7, questions for consultation

 

 

ARE THESE ANY HELP ?

 

Thanks, that's what I needed...Click coming your way.

[Professor Fate]

To my mind it doesn't really matter whether Professor Fate is MIB or not. If he is, big deal. The MIB's can read this site anyway, whether we like it or not. If in doubt about a fellow CAGer or not, just remember everything said on this forum is public.

 

Interesting angle you raise on the 'stat' PF. I presume a statutory demand issued through the high court is the first phase of a potential bankruptcy process - if you can't pay. Although Amex can be as stupid as the rest of us I'd be genuinely surprised if they'd try that route if it had absolutely no merit whatsoever.

 

It is the first and only step in bankruptcy. I fobbed them off many times after a while they didnt bother to send me anything until late last year I got a letter from their solicitors with the usual threats which I ignored. Then in February i got a letter from a trace agency saying they were to present a statutory demand on behalf of a client. I didnt know which creditor as I have a few. I ignored that as well. No name of creditor does not deserve a response. I mean how can you respond to un-named creditor?

 

On 2 March 2007 I was presented by hand with a statutory demand by an agency aptly called C-I-N. They are on the web. The guy at the door gave me some BS about being a clerk of the court blah de blah which was utter BS but I said nothing, not even confirm my name. Generally dont confirm anything verbally.

 

The server did not get a written acknowledgement from me or anything else as sometimes its advantageous in case of delays. Plsm read the section regarding serving a stat demand or I can post If you prefer?

[ladybird17]

we are going off thread again.........!!

Prof. Fate - maybe you could open a thread in Amex forum?

[m55dlc]

we are going off thread again.........!!

Prof. Fate - maybe you could open a thread in Amex forum?

 

It's OK LB the Prof is just providing rebuttal vs our belief he's a MIB. We all feel more at home discussing things with people when we have a bit more background info. The surgical nature of his (hers?) original question piqued my paranoid alarm bells level.

[Guest The Terminator]

No forthcoming answer to post 4444 then..Comom InKogneeToh,,you're my hero here...surely you have the answer

 

I answerd it two nights ago:D April 2007 & sometime in 2008

[ladybird17]

oh m55, I am disappointed - nobody checked me out when I joined this thread (although it was some time at the beginning - about a gazillion years ago it seems!) - does that mean I sound so stupid it wasn't even WORTH checking me out?

[Professor Fate]

It's OK LB the Prof is just providing rebuttal vs our belief he's a MIB. We all feel more at home discussing things with people when we have a bit more background info. The surgical nature of his (hers?) original question piqued my paranoid alarm bells level.

 

His.

 

Didnt know it was that surgical. Just the way I always am.

 

Havnt seen an Amex forum, can someone post pls?

 

Regarding the post about a company not been able to profit during a default of section 85, is there any common ground that this is so? Why does not the same apply to section 77-79?

[ladybird17]

Think Amex comes under "other institutions" Other Institutions

[Guest The Terminator]

It's OK LB the Prof is just providing rebuttal vs our belief he's a MIB. We all feel more at home discussing things with people when we have a bit more background info. The surgical nature of his (hers?) original question piqued my paranoid alarm bells level.

 

M55.You must start to chill out.I got a default notice yesterday from Arrow Global and I just laughed giving me 14 days to cough up all else.The only coughing I will do is to clear my throat.Anyway I can use the default as a tool because it do's not follow the Act on one little technicality Westclott sent me one the day previous for the same alleged debt.Now this is the juicy bit Arrow brought the debt from my good old buddies MBUSA but without any evidence.In one paragraph they say they have been assigned and in the next they say they've brought it.Sorry they won't confuse the Terminator.So as I have no agreement with Arrow they will be receiving a S10 DPA notice early next week and Westclott will receive a CCA request then we will see who is confused.Anyway as it's St Pat's day and im English I am just going to forget it.So if the MIB's are watching the beers are on you.

[Guest The Terminator]

Think Amex comes under "other institutions" Other Institutions

 

Is that mental institutions:D

[InKogneeToh]

 

Regarding the post about a company not been able to profit during a default of section 85, is there any common ground that this is so? Why does not the same apply to section 77-79?

 

Hi

 

VERY good question!

 

I am still looking for some evidence/case law/common law or even sod's law that shows that a creditor may not profit when in default.

 

All that the CCA says is that he may not enforce, i.e. take any action to force payment.

 

Answers on a postcard please.....

 

Regards, Pam

[progenic7]

Hi all,

 

i know i may be at risk of sounding a little like the good professor, though im certainly not MIB.

Is there much proof of (by way of case law or other) for actions in court that have gone before and been judged on ?

 

 

i have to ask this again as its bugging me now (infact this whole issue about s85, 77 ect ect)

 

does anybody in this forum have proper authority (ie case law) to show that the s85 claims, consolidation of interest and the like are legitimate claims, and not just someones interpretation from cag ?

 

i have searched the database of case law and cannot find a single ruling regarding issues of this nature. How many cag members have already been down this route in court and won up to yet ?

 

somebody please put me straight on this

 

Johnny

[Professor Fate]

I think that the real clue to this is in the original agreement where it shows what happens if either party defaults or is in breach of their obligations under the agreement. Usually there is a long list of redress for both parties regarding this, the creditors right to sue you and enforce etc. I think that if there is no redress for a debtor under similar circumstance (that there is in fact no redress for a breach or default by a creditor) it would fall under the Unfair Contract Terms 1999 as the agreement is clearly one sided and bent against the consumer. Such a thing as proven would render the agreement void.

 

Just a suggestion.

[Professor Fate]

My opinion is that you wont get redress for interest or charges through the CCA.

 

The way to get charges removed is of course common case law.

 

The way I would go for interest accured would be in a section/or non section of your original agreement using the 1999 legislation that if you have no redress for a creditors breach or default the agreement is likely to be unfair.

 

Some judge must rule on this to make it so, cant find anything yet.

[Guest The Terminator]

Hi

 

VERY good question!

 

I am still looking for some evidence/case law/common law or even sod's law that shows that a creditor may not profit when in default.

 

All that the CCA says is that he may not enforce, i.e. take any action to force payment.

 

Answers on a postcard please.....

 

Regards, Pam

 

Hi Pam I haven't got a postcard but I do have the CCA in another window and this is the one with the amendments as at 2003.Now I have been looking for what your asking but please bear with me it is there somewhere.Anyway I've been looking at S82 of the Act which may have some bearing on S85.If I am correct in what I'm thinking the whole credit industry is going to be blown wide open.

[InKogneeToh]

 

The way I would go for interest accured would be in a section/or non section of your original agreement using the 1999 legislation that if you have no redress for a creditors breach or default the agreement is likely to be unfair.

 

.

 

Hi

 

I don't think that would be of any use because regulated consumer credit agreements must be in a specified form and I haven't seen any that include any clauses regarding rights etc. apart from the statutory ones.

 

IMO the rights of each party are set out in the CCA and it's associated regs., and I see nothing about reclaiming interest if the creditor defaults.

 

There was a post earlier (I'm sure in this thread) about the language of the CCA being very precise, so I can only conclude that it means what it says and nothing else!

 

Regards, Pam

[Guest The Terminator]

Hi

 

VERY good question!

 

I am still looking for some evidence/case law/common law or even sod's law that shows that a creditor may not profit when in default.

 

All that the CCA says is that he may not enforce, i.e. take any action to force payment.

 

Answers on a postcard please.....

 

Regards, Pam

 

R Lukacs-Rajnai v Lloyds Bank Plc [1996] EWCA Civ 1027 (22nd November, 1996)

 

There is no need to read the whole judgement I've added the revelent parts below.

 

I have posted this piece of case law before which touch's on S85.Now if this case had been presented in a better way then I beleive the appelant would have won and a precedent set.

 

The Recorder was of the view that there was no breach of the duty of confidence, and that there was no negligence by the bank in supplying her with a fresh

credit card, even though they knew she was a defaulter. I have looked very carefully at the judgment and I can see no possible ground open to this lady to challenge it. The truth of the matter is, as the Recorder identified, that her main complaint relates to the withdrawal of her credit as notified to the credit agencies. It arose directly from her default on the loan agreement and she was aware that that course would follow. It was no action which gives rise to a Counterclaim.

The applicant's second complaint is against the judgment entered against her summarily. She really wishes to appeal that judgment. It is not before us, but even if she were to seek to apply, four years after Judge Cox dismissed her attempt to appeal the District Judge's order, it is now much too late for this court to interfere.

In conclusion, I would say that I fully understand how the difficulties have arisen. I am not in a position to say to what extent her real anxieties are or are not worth founding, but it is too late to interfere with the judgment. I do not know whether the applicant would have succeeded on that judgment or not. There is no opportunity for the bank to explain whether or not they complied with Section 85, but we cannot deal with it now.

Now suppose the judge had decided to go down the S85 route and this case law is over 10 years old what would the repocussions for the bank been. The Terminator Q.C now rest's his case because he needs to get ready to go out.