Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Apologies HB. Thanks for moving.   Thanks Emmzzi, just what I was looking for. That helps a lot.
    • Please monitor this thread for a reply later today
    • Plans for the Mitsubishi SpaceJet have been frozen due to budget cuts amid the virus downturn. View the full article
    • your right to reject has not been affected. at the very least you now have moved into the 6 months period where under the Consumer Rights Act you are entitled to give a single opportunity to repair after which you are entitled to reject the vehicle. maybe it will be a good idea to provide them with a letter to make  clear your position and what will happen if the whole matter isn't completely sorted out.   If that appeals to you then you might like to draft a letter and post it here and we can have a look. I think it's a good idea to state your position clearly so that nobody is in any doubt.   in terms of your part exchange vehicle, if you reject your new car then they will be obliged to refund you the entire asking price of it. In other words they will be obliged to substitute a money value for your old vehicle.   it might be worth stating that as well in your letter for clarity. I would suggest that in the intervening time it would be worth making a list of all the losses that you have suffered as a result of this situation and then if it looks like a worthwhile figure then we can help you claim it back            
    • Morning dx its signed, will post a picture when I get back from work what they sent her and have a read of some of the thteads you mentioned.
  • Our picks

    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies
    • Oven repair. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/427690-oven-repair/&do=findComment&comment=5073391
      • 49 replies
    • I came across this discussion recently and just wanted to give my experience of A Shade Greener that may help others regarding their boiler finance agreement.
       
      We had a 10yr  finance contract for a boiler fitted July 2015.
       
      After a summer of discontent with ASG I discovered that if you have paid HALF the agreement or more you can legally return the boiler to them at no cost to yourself. I've just returned mine the feeling is liberating.
       
      It all started mid summer during lockdown when they refused to service our boiler because we didn't have a loft ladder or flooring installed despite the fact AS installed the boiler. and had previosuly serviced it without issue for 4yrs. After consulting with an independent installer I was informed that if this was the case then ASG had breached building regulations,  this was duly reported to Gas Safe to investigate and even then ASG refused to accept blame and repeatedly said it was my problem. Anyway Gas Safe found them in breach of building regs and a compromise was reached.
       
      A month later and ASG attended to service our boiler but in the process left the boiler unusuable as it kept losing pressure not to mention they had damaged the filling loop in the process which they said was my responsibilty not theres and would charge me to repair, so generous of them! Soon after reporting the fault I got a letter stating it was time we arranged a powerflush on our heating system which they make you do after 5 years even though there's nothing in the contract that states this. Coincidence?
       
      After a few heated exchanges with ASG (pardon the pun) I decided to pull the plug and cancel our agreement.
       
      The boiler was removed and replaced by a reputable installer,  and the old boiler was returned to ASG thus ending our contract with them. What's mad is I saved in excess of £1000 in the long run and got a new boiler with a brand new 12yr warranty. 
       
      You only have to look at TrustPilot to get an idea of what this company is like.
       
        • Thanks
      • 3 replies
    • Dazza a few months ago I discovered a good friend of mine who had ten debts with cards and catalogues which he was slavishly paying off at detriment to his own family quality of life, and I mean hardship, not just absence of second holidays or flat screen TV's.
       
      I wrote to all his creditors asking for supporting documents and not one could provide any material that would allow them to enforce the debt.
       
      As a result he stopped paying and they have been unable to do anything, one even admitted it was unenforceable.
       
      If circumstances have got to the point where you are finding it unmanageable you must ask yourself why you feel the need to pay.  I guarantee you that these companies have built bad debt into their business model and no one over there is losing any sleep over your debt to them!  They will see you as a victim and cash cow and they will be reluctant to discuss final offers, only ways to keep you paying with threats of court action or seizing your assets if you have any.
       
      They are not your friends and you owe them no loyalty or moral duty, that must remain only for yourself and your family.
       
      If it was me I would send them all a CCA request.   I would bet that not one will provide the correct response and you can quite legally stop paying them until such time as they do provide a response.   Even when they do you should check back here as they mostly send dodgy photo copies or generic rubbish that has no connection with your supposed debt.
       
      The money you are paying them should, as far as you are able, be put to a savings account for yourself and as a means of paying of one of these fleecers should they ever manage to get to to the point of a successful court judgement.  After six years they will not be able to start court action and that money will then become yours.
       
      They will of course pursue you for the funds and pass your file around various departments of their business and out to third parties.
       
      Your response is that you should treat it as a hobby.  I have numerous files of correspondence each faithfully organised showing the various letters from different DCA;s , solicitors etc with a mix of threats, inducements and offers.   It is like my stamp collection and I show it to anyone who is interested!
        • Thanks
        • Like

Grace & anr -v- Black Horse ltd - major headache for CRAs???????


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1960 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

The Court of Appeal to hand down judgment this morning.

Could give the CRAs and creditors major problems if successful.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 94
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

When will it be available, Paul ?

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

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

Can we see the industry changing its registration systems !

 

38.As for the second submission, I have not been persuaded that the shortcomings in the CRAs' registration systems can excuse a registration which is in substance inaccurate because of an omission (namely that the 'default' related to an unenforceable agreement). If an accurate registration cannot be accommodated, then the answer is for the industry to change its registration systems, and in the meantime for inaccurate registrations not to be made.

 

 

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

This could be a major problem for Halifax who have openly admitted in letters to customers that "whilst the debt might be unenforceable" they will continue to pursue by foul means or fair.. short of issuing a claim.

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
This could be a major problem for Halifax who have openly admitted in letters to customers that "whilst the debt might be unenforceable" they will continue to pursue by foul means or fair.. short of issuing a claim.

 

Sure could.

 

Me thinks a claim for breach of the fourth principle could be pursued and compensation in line with Durkin may be awarded if loss is proved.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is an interesting judgment.

 

In itself it does not challenge McGuffic, as the case is about irredeemably enforceable agreements(127) as opposed to section 78 etc.

 

The judge decided that a default should not be recorded on an irredeemably unenforceable agreement unless there was some notice along side the default which indicated the status.

 

He did however hint that the same logic may be applicable to the temporary unenforceability applied to copy requirement breaches(section 77 etc.) But left that decision to "another day"

 

A couple of other helpful tit-bits contained, one of which was the judges comment that unenforceability should not be regarded as a technical breach.

 

There will I suppose be a spate of claims for damages, personally I cannot see them being effective.

 

The cause would be that the CRA should have placed a marker on the default stating that the defaulted account was unenforceable, if this is the case then the losses suffered by the debtor would be slight as most potential creditors would regard the D with the notice in the same light as one without, this is only my opinion of course.

 

It may be that the court would decide that there should have been any record at all(if inaccurate) if the agreement was unenforcdable in which a claim may be viable.

 

A note of caution however in that the judge did say that a reason for the decision was that Mr grace's default was not registered until after the agreement was found to be unenforceable, I am not sure if the same logic would apply if someone stopped paying and then after the event the agreement was proven to be so.

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

Dodgeball,

I must disagree with your interpretation that the Judges found "Mr Grace didnot default before the agrement was declared unenforceable"

The default occurred some 12 months before the agreement was deemed ......"iredeemably unenforceable" and I am sorry it nullifies McGuffick......its in the bin............

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dodgeball,

I must disagree with your interpretation that the Judges found "Mr Grace didnot default before the agrement was declared unenforceable"

The default occurred some 12 months before the agreement was deemed ......"iredeemably unenforceable" and I am sorry it nullifies McGuffick......its in the bin............

 

 

I most certainly agree with catchthemonkey this judgement changes much.

 

 

No doubt we will see a raft of pointless discussion on this now!

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

32. In one sense Mr Brennan is clearly right. Flaux J was clearly not laying down a single

rule for all cases of unenforceability, and he clearly did not regard his decision as

applicable to irremediable unenforceability, at least without further analysis, which

Judge Halbert did not provide. But I consider that his assumption to that effect was

nonetheless correct. My reasons follow.

 

I would re- read the jusgement

 

 

33. The conclusion that even irremediable unenforceability leaves the underlying

agreement, and its rights and obligations, in place seems to me to flow inexorably

from the authorities about other forms of statutory unenforceability and, in particular,

from the Orakpo case which, as I have noted, was about irremediable

unenforceability. I agree with Flaux J that this conclusion is not displaced by the

obiter dicta in the Wilson case. Further, the CCA makes an apparently careful

distinction between unenforceability and voidness as the sanction for different kinds

of non- compliance by creditors: see ss. 59(1) and 173(1) which provide for voidness,

and ss. 65(1), 77(4)(a) and 90(1) which provide for various forms of unenforceability.

S.91(b) provides in terms for a release of the debtor from liability under the

agreement in the stated circumstances.

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
Dodgeball,

I must disagree with your interpretation that the Judges found "Mr Grace didnot default before the agrement was declared unenforceable"

The default occurred some 12 months before the agreement was deemed ......"iredeemably unenforceable" and I am sorry it nullifies McGuffick......its in the bin............

 

39. Thirdly, there is nothing in Miss Urell’s point that Mr Grace defaulted before his

agreement had been declared unenforceable (and that on the court’s own motion).

The default registration was not made until after the judgment declaring

unenforceability,

 

As said it would be helpful if the judgement was read before comment are made.

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
I most certainly agree with catchthemonkey this judgement changes much.

 

 

No doubt we will see a raft of pointless discussion on this now!

 

Discussion is never pointless Brigadier, it is how we learn.

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

This was a helpful cmment

 

Nor is there merit in the submission that Mr Grace had escaped enforcement on

technical grounds. The requirements of the CCA for which unenforceability is the

sanction are part of a structure laid down by Parliament for the protection of

consumers and the regulation of the consumer credit market. Although they may be

technical in their application, and the consequences for non-compliance sometimes

draconian, they are not mere technicalities

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

Just to put matters absolutely in perspective Dodgeball.........I know much more about this case than ANYone................I know exactly when the arrears occurred, how they occurred and the default made........... .consider why I have said that..........what is stated in the judgement as alleged facts........ does not mean they are correct.......Sorry to say

Link to post
Share on other sites
This was a helpful cmment

 

Nor is there merit in the submission that Mr Grace had escaped enforcement on

technical grounds. The requirements of the CCA for which unenforceability is the

sanction are part of a structure laid down by Parliament for the protection of

consumers and the regulation of the consumer credit market. Although they may be

technical in their application, and the consequences for non-compliance sometimes

draconian, they are not mere technicalities

 

This is very important and I am pleased the Judge emphasised this.

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
Just to put matters absolutely in perspective Dodgeball.........I know much more about this case than ANYone................I know exactly when the arrears occurred, how they occurred and the default made........... .consider why I have said that..........what is stated in the judgement as alleged facts........ does not mean they are correct.......Sorry to say

 

I am sure you do. However unless the judgement is challenged the facts stated within it will stand, and it is this that will be used to provide authority on future cases, NOT YOUR KNOWLEDGE SADLY.

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
This is very important and I am pleased the Judge emphasised this.

Indeed, lost count of how many times I ahve heard creditors council sneer at theses defenses with the remark that it is just a technical def fence, it is good to hear the judge echo the view which mny of us have had for some years.

 

I am not saying that this is not a useful judgement, it is, however sometimes the importance of these cases are exaggerated for various reasons, and it helps to keep things in perspective.

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
Discussion is never pointless Brigadier, it is how we learn.

 

Agreed. I for one will be very interested to understand the ramifications of this case. I'm sure many others will too. All too often we see cases being hailed as likely to make hugely significant, when in reality there have been issues specific to the case which render it of little use to others. I hope that this isn't one. Bring on the (polite) discussion. :)

 

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
Agreed. I for one will be very interested to understand the ramifications of this case. I'm sure many others will too. All too often we see cases being hailed as likely to make hugely significant, when in reality there have been issues specific to the case which render it of little use to others. I hope that this isn't one. Bring on the (polite) discussion. :)

 

Indeed sadly it seems that the main thrust of this case was lost, it was a section 90 issue (unlawful repossession of protected goods).

The firm of solicitors seem to be quite happy with the result nevertheless, as the associated issue has brought possible claims for default damages into the arena, in the form af a precedent setting authority.

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

Basically the judge sid that if the status of the defaulted account cannot be recorded correctly then it should not be recorded at all, so in the cse of an agreement which has been proven to be irredeemably unenforceable there should be some mechanism for indicating the fact that whilst the account is in default the debtor has no obligation to pay in law.

 

The reason that this does not interfere with Mcguffic is because in that case the issue was not regarding irredeemable unenforceablity it was in respect of the temporary unenforceability sanction imposed by the copy regulations.

He does however speculate that the same principle may be applied, but that would be for another court to decide.

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
Basically the judge sid that if the status of the defaulted account cannot be recorded correctly then it should not be recorded at all, so in the cse of an agreement which has been proven to be irredeemably unenforceable there should be some mechanism for indicating the fact that whilst the account is in default the debtor has no obligation to pay in law.

 

The reason that this does not interfere with Mcguffic is because in that case the issue was not regarding irredeemable unenforceablity it was in respect of the temporary unenforceability sanction imposed by the copy regulations.

He does however speculate that the same principle may be applied, but that would be for another court to decide.

 

It appears that you are much more knowledgeable than the solicitors ...and Barrister the appellants legal team plus a very eminent QC who has taken extreme interest in the case who all agree that McGuffick is no longer worth much........ as that was a High Court ruling this is case law ......... McGuffick isn't/wasn't.

 

The saga of this case has not ended yet...this is just the beginning.

I will take their view over yours every time

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we please stick to discussing the judgment and cut out the sarcasm, mud slinging and worse.

 

I imagine there will be differences of opinion even within the legal industry and I am pretty certain they aren't being so unpleasant.

 

If you are unable to have a sensible and civil discussion - then please stay away. I am truly tired of the juvenile mutterings that deter others from getting involved in what could be a very important judgment.

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
Can we please stick to discussing the judgment and cut out the sarcasm, mud slinging and worse.

 

I imagine there will be differences of opinion even within the legal industry and I am pretty certain they aren't being so unpleasant.

 

If you are unable to have a sensible and civil discussion - then please stay away. I am truly tired of the juvenile mutterings that deter others from getting involved in what could be a very important judgment.

 

I see you are having another good go at me "OLD SPARKIE" so I will stay away as I did when I was attacking SwiftAdvances plc.

 

I leave you with is link.

http://consumercreditlitigationandde...-for-the-case/

CatchTheMonkey........ aka Sparkie

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...