Finance U aka Corner Park Garage - claim form***Claim Dismissed***

[RCT40]

Yes...but only one of you can get judgment

 

Thank you Andy. Can you point me to any information on this please. I could have worded that slightly better, lack of sleep!

[AndyOrch]

Information with regards to securing your judgment as a Charging Order ?

[RCT40]

Information with regards to securing your judgment as a Charging Order ?

 

Yes, if you can.

[AndyOrch]

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part73/pd_part73

[RCT40]

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part73/pd_part73

 

Thank you, comforting to know that the risk is the same for each party, considering this was used Wednesday in an attempt to frighten me into rolling over.

[AndyOrch]

Whats good for the goose.....

[theoldrouge]

I've been trawling my email and found, the confirmations from my insurance company when I did the change of vehicle after speaking to the salesman late afternoon on 30th March 2012.

 

I'm going to add to my evidence the agreement for the vehicle that I had from them in 2010. This agreement is very different from the one for the BMW and has a different agreement number. On the first vehicle I left a holding deposit, but couldn't pickup it up for almost two weeks, I also found the transaction in my online banking for payment of the deposit balance which shows as 25/9/2010 - and the agreements were signed on 24/9/2010.

 

As for the I don't need to send you an agreement, because you've got a pre-contract and your an existing customer and know the terms and conditions, would this be the right section to quote? http://http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/61A

Correct section

 

I wouldn't worry too much about the old

agreement, he hasn't got a leg to stand on

in this regard

 

Totally new and separate agreement

He's in breach of s61 a

[RCT40]

Sounds like it, wonder why he didn't disclose earlier if it's suddenly so important

 

I've received a copy of the diary entries, as expected theres things in there that didn't happen. Shouldn't these have been included with the SAR?

 

Not quiet sure how I should respond to it.

[theoldrouge]

If its personal identifiable data then yes it should

 

Does your existing ws and disclosures

 

cover the matters he has now raised?

[RCT40]

Thanks for coming back to me rouge,

it is personally identifiable in as much as it includes my name and account number.

 

 

I would say that my ws and disclosure were/are at odds with the bogus entries in this new document.

 

 

However after going through the 400-500 pieces of paper gathered on this issue since 2012, I unearthed a previous copy of the diary notes provided to me under the SAR last September that I'd attached no importance to, because until today it wasn't important and was covered in my ws.

 

The deadline for filing additional evidence was today,

since we last spoke I've had the case transferred to my local court which is 10 mins away by car,

so I've handed delivered a copy of the notes I'd been given to the court today

- so, with two conflicting sets of diary notes, he's dug himself a bigger hole probably.

[RCT40]

Can anyone point me to a source that shows the differences between a PCI, unexecuted and an executed agreement please?

[theoldrouge]

Read s55cca1974

 

CONC 4.2 FCA Consumer Credit Sourcebook

 

inc

(4) for bill of sale loan agreements:

(a) the risk of losing the asset which is the subject of the bill of sale and the loss this could entail;

(b) that repossession can take place without a court order;

© that repossession may not clear the debt owed; and

(d) unlike in the case of hire-purchase agreements and conditional sale agreements, the customer is not protected under this arrangement from repossession of the asset where one third or more of the total amount payable has been paid off;

 

 

 

and

The Consumer Credit ( Agreements) Regulations 1983

 

That should occupy your evening RCT

[RCT40]

Read s55cca1974

 

CONC 4.2 FCA Consumer Credit Sourcebook

 

inc

(4) for bill of sale loan agreements:

(a) the risk of losing the asset which is the subject of the bill of sale and the loss this could entail;

(b) that repossession can take place without a court order;

© that repossession may not clear the debt owed; and

(d) unlike in the case of hire-purchase agreements and conditional sale agreements, the customer is not protected under this arrangement from repossession of the asset where one third or more of the total amount payable has been paid off;

 

 

 

and

The Consumer Credit ( Agreements) Regulations 1983

 

That should occupy your evening RCT

 

Thanks again Rouge, I've sent you a PM, hope you don't mind...

[RCT40]

I'm just wondering whether someone could tell me please what the likely outcome is if the claimant doesn't provide trial bundles prior to the trial taking place?

[AndyOrch]

Failure to comply with Directions RT......request sanctions be imposed

[RCT40]

Thank you Andy, What do you mean by sanctions?

[AndyOrch]

The Court can impose various sanctions.....strike out... or else order....last chance saloon warning..but you have to notify the court....have you checked to see if they have filed it with the court?

[RCT40]

It hadn't been filed with the court yesterday - I'm trying to get through to check again today. Trial is on Tuesday, what would you suggest that I do Andy?

[AndyOrch]

Can you email your Court?

[RCT40]

Yes I can.

[RCT40]

Just a quick update on the outcome of this one,

 

Claimants claim dismissed as Credit Agreement found unenforceable.

 

My counter claim also dismissed.

 

Quite happy with this, my credit file can be cleaned up and don't have it hanging over me any longer.

 

Thanks to everyone that helped with advice.

[AndyOrch]

Well done RCT

 

Delighted that this has been resolved for you.Perhaps give a little synopsis of the outcome for the benefit of users following your thread so they know how and why it was dismissed.

 

 

Thread title amended to reflect the outcome

 

Regards

 

Andy

[RCT40]

The essence of it being dismissed was because the claimant insisted that he gave me the car on 31st March and I returned on 6th April 2012 and signed a finance agreement

- the judge wouldn't buy that,

 

 

and with the evidence we provided found that the agreement was signed on 31st March and therefore the Bill of Sale document was not registered within the specified period giving way to an unenforceable agreement.

 

Our counter claim failed,

because we had intended to enter a valid agreement and had made those payments in the thought that it was indeed valid.

However I still think the counter claim was worthwhile as it put pressure back on the claimant.

 

The claimant didn't provide any bundles as directed,

however the judge other than had a moan at him didn't take any further action.

[obiter dictum]

This was dismised due to the Bill of Sale issue

 

Can the Claimant instigate another claim??

 

Now CPR 38.7 Prohibits a new claim on the same particulars but a second bite at the apple without the Bill of Sale and simply on the Consumer Credit Act??

 

And finally if the Car was repo on a dodgy Bill of Sale, can a debtor then sue Finance U or the creditor for breach of contract with an unlawful repo??

Edited March 21, 2017 by obiter dictum

[dx100uk]

IMHO yes and off you go RCT

you've done it once already...and WON