Jump to content



Richard Durkin wins Supreme Court appeal – beware lenders!


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1398 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Richard Durkin has won his appeal – HFC liable for damages for breach of duty and trashing his credit rating (but the court can’t re-award the original damages).

 

So lenders had better beware when falsely recording defaults with the CRAs and crapping on people’s financial reputations.

 

Well done Richard.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-26731192

 

There are lost of implications from this judgment (which existed before his original win was reversed on appeal) which I’m sure will filter out over the next few days.

 

s75.1 of the CCA is now much stronger as a result of this.

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 144
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

:whoo:

 

This is now a precedent to be used when others face a similar situation.

 

http://www.supremecourt.uk/decided-cases/docs/UKSC_2012_0135_Judgment.pdf

 

The full judgment

  • Haha 1

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

good news

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

 

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

 

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Richard Durkin has won his appeal – HFC liable for damages for breach of duty and trashing his credit rating (but the court can’t re-award the original damages).

 

So lenders had better beware when falsely recording defaults with the CRAs and crapping on people’s financial reputations.

 

Well done Richard.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-26731192

 

There are lost of implications from this judgment (which existed before his original win was reversed on appeal) which I’m sure will filter out over the next few days.

 

s75.1 of the CCA is now much stronger as a result of this.

 

 

Section 75 argument failed in this, and there was little mention of the damages issue as the SC was not entitled to over rule the previous decision.

 

However the rescission of an associated credit agreement due to the implied term contained in section 11 of the act may well be useful to consumers in the future.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good result CB. I still try and keep up with events. You are doing a sterling job. Regards to all on the team :)

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

------------------------------------------------

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Woohoo. Richard wins and alanalana pops up out of nowhere. A good day even if Richards damages aren't what they were it's a moral victory.

 

Nice to see you AA. :)

 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to see you are still keeping in touch, alanalana :)

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to see this ruling. Well done Richard.

 

I notice that nearly all newspapers and media outlets are saying:

 

"hfc put him on the credit blacklist for several years"

 

I thought there was no such thing so why does the mainstream media spread this myth.?

CAG has helped me so much since I joined. Based on what I have learnt from others on here and my own experiences, I try to chip in and help others from time to time. I am not an expert and give my opinion only. Always check with the more experienced CAG members before making important decisions.

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Good to see this ruling. Well done Richard.

 

I notice that nearly all newspapers and media outlets are saying:

 

"hfc put him on the credit blacklist for several years"

 

I thought there was no such thing so why does the mainstream media spread this myth.?

 

It is black listing in all but name, isnt it ?

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

A default on a credit file does indeed put pretty much all creditors off lending but I really think the public need educating about how credit reporting works.

 

There is no "list"

 

I am certainly in agreement with that martin lewis guy when he says we should teach personal financial management in schools. Way too much misconception out there imo

CAG has helped me so much since I joined. Based on what I have learnt from others on here and my own experiences, I try to chip in and help others from time to time. I am not an expert and give my opinion only. Always check with the more experienced CAG members before making important decisions.

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't understand this.

 

He bought a laptop, paid £50 deposit and rest on credit.

He then returned the laptop and got £50 back

He was still obliged to make payments on credit

 

So what happened to the £1000 odd that came from the credit agreement? Did PC World keep that and the laptop after it was returned? Or did the finance company receive a refund of the amount from PC World and still demanded he make payments even though they'd received a refund of the loan amount?

 

Really seems like a ridiculous case and something common sense should've sorted years ago!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Really seems like a ridiculous case and something common sense should've sorted years ago!!

 

Yep !!!

 

Silly case really. I don't think PC World accepted the return of the computer under SOGA (they just returned the deposit) and they said the finance was a totally separate issue. There was still finance outstanding, which tarnished Mr Durkins credit record, to the extent that he got turned down for a mortgage. The silly thing is that PC World would have been acting as an agent for the credit providers and they could have cancelled the credit arrangement, but they didn't.

 

Mr Durkin has gone bankrupt due this case and if there has now been an important SC decision that will benefit consumers, it would be great if some form of charity appeal was raised, so atleast it could put Mr Durkin back in a better position. It does take people like Mr Durkin to pursue such cases to gain some form of justice to consumers.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent news, but poor Mr Durkin has lost his livelihood, home etc, as the case has taken SIXTEEN years to get resolved!! This is absolutely disgusting of our legal system. So, no mention of all the money the legal 'profession' have made from this case even though they're the ONLY winners for now and some future consumers with similar problems.

 

Has he got the right to 'appeal' on the measly £8k compensation he's received or is that it for him now?

 

Rgds.

radmm0

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a shame though he had to spend over a quarter of a million pounds to prove his point. While a victory for the consumer it certainly didn't seem so for him. Maybe someone should start an online charity and donate to him so he can recoup his losses. After all we all benefit from it don't we?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is certainly going to be interesting to see how the DCA's and CRA's respond to this precedent. If as the judgement suggests the burden of proof is now upon the OC's before they can credit reference will it open the floodgates for all their past misdemeanor's?

 

 

There is a worry for me though that the outfall from this may work against some of us who defend claims based upon proof of debt and production of evidence.

 

 

There will invariably now be further test cases where "Debt removal" companies pick up on a persons old debt and the credit referencing that has come with it and try to "clean credit files" and try to obtain compensation. This will then set further precedent on what validates agreements.

 

 

Whilst I am pleased for Mr Durkin and as unclebulgaria67 says it was a silly case I am worried how this pans out going forward! It may be a double edged sword and the implications will be far reaching!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Summary from Compass Chambers:

 

Durkin v DSG (Trading as PC World) and HFC Bank - Supreme Court Judgement 26/3/14

 

This case arose from an appeal from the First Division of the Inner House to the Supreme Court in which the appeal was successful on the Pursuer’s behalf. The Pursuer was represented by Andrew Smith QC and Richard Pugh, both of Compass Chambers. The Defender (HFC) was represented by Alastair Clark QC and Fintan McShane.

 

The facts have attracted a lot of publicity in the popular press, but turned on the whether when a consumer bought goods with credit, if the goods were validly returned to the supplier did the contract of credit also fall thus relieving the consumer from the obligation to make any further payments under the contract of credit?

 

The second issue for determination was what obligations there were on a creditor under such a contract to investigate the existence of the debt (which would fly off in the event that the principal argument was correct that the contract of credit fell simultaneously with the fall of the contract of supply of the goods) and whether a report could be made to a credit reference agency.

 

The Supreme Court held that once the contract of sale fell (for example because of the goods being faulty or not conform to contract) then the contract of credit automatically fell too, thus relieving the consumer from any obligation to make further payments under the contract of credit. Further, the court held that the creditor was under an obligation to investigate whether a debt existed prior to making any report to credit reference agencies. In the event of disputed debt, they must not make a report until the existence of the debt is adjudicated upon by a court if necessary, but whilst there is such dispute, they must make no report to the agencies.

 

This case will cause a major shift in the practices of creditors and debt collection agencies. Instead of using the threat to report bad debt to the agencies as a means of forcing payment from a consumer, the creditors are now prohibited from making a report until the debt is actually established. An example may assist.

 

A consumer purchases a computer and has credit provided for its purchase. It develops a fault and he takes it back to the shop. The shop refuses to accept it is faulty.

 

Usually the creditor would, if payments under the credit agreement are stopped by the consumer, threaten to report the consumer to a credit reference agency. This dramatic and effective threat would often result in the consumer paying for goods that were faulty.

 

In the light of the Durkin judgment, the creditor must investigate whether the debt is due – and that means investigating whether the goods were validly rejected by the consumer. If there is a dispute – other than a plainly ridiculous one – there can be no report unless and until the matter is determined by agreement of the parties or by court action. The court action envisaged by the Court is either an action for payment by the Creditor (where the Debtor can defend on the basis that the goods were validly rejected), or an action by the consumer (for example against the supplier for refund of sums already paid.

 

It is highly likely that there are many consumers who have been subjected to damage to their credit, or paid sums under threat that it now appears were not in fact validly extracted who now have claims for past losses.

 

The judgment is a major victory for consumers which restores power to the consumers which was intended when the 1974 Act was passed, but eroded by creditors using threats to extract sums without resorting to litigation.

 

Andrew Smith and Richard Pugh were asked to review the papers via the Free Legal Services Unit, and thereafter when accepting the instructions did so without charging any fee to Mr.Durkin. A copy of the judgement can be found here.

 

http://www.compasschambers.com/news/durkin_v_dsg_trading_as_pc_world_and_hfc_bank_supreme_court_judgement_26_314

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that this is potentially good news for consumers being hounded but not such great news for Mr Durkin after being taken to the cleaners!!

 

How does this relate to 3rd party interlopers (aka debt recovery agencies/parasites) who claim to have purchased a debt, often without proof, and then adding a "black mark" (default) to a credit file?

 

I speak from personal experience where two of these companies have entered a single entry each on a credit report pertaining to me (both relating to credit cards); no previous payment history, just a default. They then refuse to remove it and refuse to provide proof of ownership of the debt and/or notice of assignment proof.

 

This is genuinely affecting my ability to obtain a mortgage and I desperately wish to move (and can genuinely afford to)!!

 

Any thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree that this is potentially good news for consumers being hounded but not such great news for Mr Durkin after being taken to the cleaners!!

 

How does this relate to 3rd party interlopers (aka debt recovery agencies/parasites) who claim to have purchased a debt, often without proof, and then adding a "black mark" (default) to a credit file?

 

I speak from personal experience where two of these companies have entered a single entry each on a credit report pertaining to me (both relating to credit cards); no previous payment history, just a default. They then refuse to remove it and refuse to provide proof of ownership of the debt and/or notice of assignment proof.

 

This is genuinely affecting my ability to obtain a mortgage and I desperately wish to move (and can genuinely afford to)!!

 

Any thoughts?

 

Why don't you write to the Head of Legal at the DCA's quoting the Durkin judgement. Ask them to remove any marks they have applied to your credit record, in the absence of any proof that the debt exists and that they have bought the debt under the law of property act 1925. I am sure you can come up with a wording and see how they respond.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just thought. Doesn't the other side in such cases have to pay all costs? So, does that mean Mr Durkin will actually get all the money back?

 

Enlighten us please someone with the right knowledge!

 

radmm0

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why don't you write to the Head of Legal at the DCA's quoting the Durkin judgement. Ask them to remove any marks they have applied to your credit record, in the absence of any proof that the debt exists and that they have bought the debt under the law of property act 1925. I am sure you can come up with a wording and see how they respond.

 

Need to research the relevance of the law of property act 1925 (unless you care to enlighten me/us) but I do have every intention of writing to the DCAs, and previous CCs who have pressurised me into actions that I would not have taken if defaults weren't threatened and applied to accounts that were in dispute!

 

Is this retrospective in that respect, i.e. where a case has been taken to court and settled, or settled out of court due to such threats/applications of defaults?

 

Certainly is a very interesting change and finally the people are getting something in their favour. Hence it taking 16 years!!!

 

I will need to check the judgement in full, but does this apply to mortgages where a dispute arises, or just in relation to credit agreements under the CCA?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t forget that there are already judgments in place regarding banks’ actions that cause harm to a customer’s financial reputation, eg. Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] – http://e-lawresources.co.uk/cases/Kpohraror-v-Woolwich-Building-Society.php

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know Richard frequents this forum, so if you read this, Congratulations!

 

 

I know the judgement did not yield all you deserved, but if it wasn't for people like you this world would be a worse place!

If in doubt, contact a qualified insured legal professional (or my wife... she knows EVERYTHING)

 

Or send a cheque or postal order payable to Reclaim the Right Ltd.

to

923 Finchley Road London NW11 7PE

 

 

Click here if you fancy an email address that shows you mean business! (only £6 and that will really help CAG)

 

If you can't donate, please use the Internet Search boxes on the CAG pages - these will generate a small but regular income for the site

 

Please also consider using the

C.A.G. Toolbar

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...