Cap1 & CCA return

[foolishgirl]

 

Maybe the answer lies in the word SHOULD(??)

 

 

Can see where you're coming from jax

 

Dictionary definition of 'shall' (should - past tense of shall) - '...express obligation, command, condition or intention'

 

Doesn't say 'may' or ' might' does it?

[un1boy]

are you still going to appeal?

 

Yup, absolutely - I am waitign for everyone to check over what I want to put on the form and when I get the order and teh N640 (which should be tomorrow or the enxt day) the the N164 (appeal form) will be submitted straight away!!

 

Bring it on!

[gaz2006]

link above doesnt get the one i want Regards gaz

[un1boy]

Maybe the answer lies in the word SHOULD(??)

 

 

the answer lies in that the judge will see it how they want to be honest - doesn't matter what you tell/show them, if they agree they agree, if they don't, they don't - even if was a a specific paragraph of a specific act saying "the document must be original, otherwise it cannot be used and the court must assume it does not exist" personally signed by the Queen, it would still only mean whatever that specific judge thought it was!!

[jax007]

Actually now you've thrown a different slant on what I was thinking FG.

 

'shall' ... express obligation, command ... to my mind is interpreted as MUST

 

I was thinking that 'should' would mean 'it ought to be, but doesn't have to' as opposed 'must be'

 

Do you follow?

 

Jeez we really are flogging this one for all it's worth, eh:p

 

And all this started because I have what appears to be an enforceable agreement but not a 'true' copy ... only what looks like a reconstructed scanned document.

 

So even if I get Lloyds to admit to not having the original document ... where does that leave me in terms of getting it deemed unenforceable on the basis there is no 'original' document??

 

Thinks .... I'll write to Lloyds and see what they come back with, ask to inspect the original and then take it from there!!

 

jax

[un1boy]

link above doesnt get the one i want Regards gaz

 

Try this: CPR - Parts and Practice Directions

[un1boy]

link above doesnt get the one i want Regards gaz

 

More speifically:

 

PRACTICE DIRECTION – STATEMENTS OF CASE - This practice direction supplements CPR Part 16

[jax007]

link above doesnt get the one i want Regards gaz

 

Surely there is only one??!!

 

Sorry gaz but can't what else it would be

 

jax

[jax007]

That's the same as I posted Uniboy

 

jax

[un1boy]

Actually now you've thrown a different slant on what I was thinking FG.

 

'shall' ... express obligation, command ... to my mind is interpreted as MUST

 

I was thinking that 'should' would mean 'it ought to be, but doesn't have to' as opposed 'must be'

 

Do you follow?

 

Jeez we really are flogging this one for all it's worth, eh:p

 

And all this started because I have what appears to be an enforceable agreement but not a 'true' copy ... only what looks like a reconstructed scanned document.

 

So even if I get Lloyds to admit to not having the original document ... where does that leave me in terms of getting it deemed unenforceable on the basis there is no 'original' document??

 

Thinks .... I'll write to Lloyds and see what they come back with, ask to inspect the original and then take it from there!!

 

jax

 

To be honest Jax, I really think that you'll struggle with this without having to take it to the house of lords and court of appeal.

 

don't forget that in a county court, it's balance of probably over proof beyond resonable doubt - and we've all seen that, despite the explicitness of the CCA, that the DJ's have been making "illegal" rulings that go against the act and in most cases, making rulings against rulings already made by a higher court (hope that makes sense).

 

the court would probably accept a certified copy of an agreement as an original - they have accepted a template pro-forma I was apparently sent as confirmation that the default notice would have looked like that, despite them not having the original.

[un1boy]

That's the same as I posted Uniboy

 

jax

 

Oh, sorry! lol

[jax007]

My question again is that, if the judge forms his own opinions, then what is the point of having these practice directions? Doesn't make sense

 

jax

[un1boy]

My question again is that, if the judge forms his own opinions, then what is the point of having these practice directions? Doesn't make sense

 

jax

 

Je ne sais pas!

[jax007]

What constitutes a 'certified' copy then?

 

Oh, sorry! lol

 

I only said I had posted it because gaz said it wasn't the one he wanted!

 

 

jax

[un1boy]

What constitutes a 'certified' copy then?

 

Personally, I think that it shoudl be the original that is produced because otherwise they could say that anything was included and get away with it, but I have first hand experience of what the DJ's are like.

 

A certified copy could be anything - just because the bank has provided it in response, a DJ COULD say it was certified, or if the bank have written "certified" on it, it COULD be seen as a certified copy.....I really don't know mate!

 

Don't forget that they submit this as evidence to the court and the judges don't expect them to lie becasue they could get done for conntempt of court and the judges don't think they would lie.......we all know however that this not the case and the banks would do anything to get their own way.

[gaz2006]

What constitutes a 'certified' copy then?

 

 

 

I only said I had posted it because gaz said it wasn't the one he wanted!

 

 

jax

 

soz im blind oopsss found it

[jax007]

Personally, I think that it shoudl be the original that is produced because otherwise they could say that anything was included and get away with it, but I have first hand experience of what the DJ's are like.

 

A certified copy could be anything - just because the bank has provided it in response, a DJ COULD say it was certified, or if the bank have written "certified" on it, it COULD be seen as a certified copy.....I really don't know mate!

 

Don't forget that they submit this as evidence to the court and the judges don't expect them to lie becasue they could get done for conntempt of court and the judges don't think they would lie.......we all know however that this not the case and the banks would do anything to get their own way.

 

So .... in your opinion, would you say it would be futile to take this further even if the bank admits to not having original??

 

soz im blind oopsss found it

 

No worries gaz LOL

 

jax

[un1boy]

So .... in your opinion, would you say it would be futile to take this further even if the bank admits to not having original??

 

If they have admitted to not having the original then I think it's difficult for them to enforce it anyway.

 

My friend took a credit card co to court regarding them not having an agreement (which they admitted) and the judge allocated it to the fast track - my mate withfrew the claim and did a balance transfer because e did not want to run the risk of and could not afford the costs involved (he would have needed legal rep).

 

It's entirely up to you Jax, it depends on the DJ lottery and how far they decided to take it in terms of to court etc......and again, what the DJ says when it is presented to them.

 

If you asked me before my last experience, I would have said - yeah, do it, I would. right after it, I would have said, "think twice". But now, I would probably say, try to go for it, if you are confident enough and have enough time/money.

 

My claims have been going for over a year and I only just got to trial, which hasn't helped. I don't really have the time or money to concentrate on both claims at the same time so I am only taking the credit card oneto court.

[foolishgirl]

A certified copy could be anything - just because the bank has provided it in response, a DJ COULD say it was certified, or if the bank have written "certified" on it, it COULD be seen as a certified copy.....

 

That is EXACTLY what a certified copy is Un1 - however it also has to be a 'true' copy & how can the bank (or its solicitors) claim that if they don't have access to the original. And if they do have access to the original, what are there reasons for not producing it in court and are they valid?!

 

and the judges don't think they would lie.......we all know however that this not the case and the banks would do anything to get their own way.

 

Lie - me, m'lud?!! We all know financial institutions are respectable responsible organisations (just look at Barings, N. Rock etc. etc.) & we all take great care of our customers' data (RBS) :grin:

 

FG

[jax007]

Thanks uni

 

What I am thinking is to find out whether or not they have the original agreement. If they do, then I won't pursue it on the basis that the copy I have received is a scanned one.

 

If they ADMIT to NOT having the ORIGINAL, I will take a view when the time comes.

 

Thanks for your advice. It gives you food for thought.

 

jax

[IIIUMINATI]

Blackstone's Civil Practice (Ciprac Blackstone's Civil Pra) (Hardcover)

 

by William Rose (Editor), et al.

 

Price at a GlanceRRP:£175.00New:from £60.00Used:from £199.85Have one to sell?

 

 

New (26 from £60.00) Used (4 from £199.85)Show

 

 

£60.00 + £2.75shipping

• 
  

[citizenB]

I clicked on the link for the £60.00 copy.. looks as though someone has purchased it

[pt2537]

Blackstones Civil practice 2008 on eBay, also, Law Legal, Educational Textbooks, Books, Comics Magazines (end time 02-Sep-08 13:42:32 BST)

 

[pt2537]

Blackstones Civil practice 2008 on eBay, also, Law Legal, Educational Textbooks, Books, Comics Magazines (end time 02-Sep-08 13:42:32 BST)

 

need to be quick though as its only got 4 hours left and its only £1.07 at the mo

[citizenB]

Thanks pt:)