Egg - DLC final straits / SETTLED

[e_inspired]

Hi e_inspired

 

Thanks for your update.

 

I know your case has a lot of "unusual" elements to it, but a lot of people (including my friend) are really interested in whether this type of Egg agreement can be declared unenforceable under s127 due to its s18 multiple agreement status.

 

Do you know if your case rests on that aspect, and if your barrister is planning to go for that specifically?

 

Hmmm... somehow I can't see Egg risking such a ruling in court if they can possibly avoid it. I really hope you don't get gagged on this one, e_inspired.

 

 

s18 is one of the points that will be raised.

I am really interested in the s59 argument, the judge also seemed really interested about this point at the hearing, imagine what it would mean if the agreement was declared VOID that would be .:eek:. Amazing... the effect would be HUGE... It would cost them loads .

 

They have risked it once already and no doubt they will risk it again. If they make a "last minute" offer I can't refuse, you would know because my last post on here would be 'Game over no comment'.

[Mistermind]

 

They have risked it once already and no doubt they will risk it again.

 

 

What was the outcome, any thread on that?

[e_inspired]

What was the outcome, any thread on that?

 

Mistermind, I was referring to this claim, they went to trial knowing the issues I had raised about the agreement etc...

[militantconsumer]

Good Luck On Wednesday :D:D:D

[e_inspired]

Good Luck On Wednesday :D:D:D

 

Thanks!!! If I am not eaten alive, I will let you know the outcome Wednesday evening

[nosnibor]

Good luck:D

[e_inspired]

Quick update, the barrister sent me a skeleton argument to send to drydens, so I emailed/faxed it yesterday night.

 

This afternoon I had offer from them saying the are now willing to remove the default as long as I pay £8,500 in 28 days time.. offer expires at 10am tomorrow (funny thing is I made an offer to pay £5000 and for them to remove the default a long time ago but they totally refused).

 

Lets see what tomorrow brings.

[lollipop73]

Good Luck e inspired.

[WelshMam2009]

This afternoon I had offer from them saying the are now willing to remove the default as long as I pay £8,500 in 28 days time.. offer expires at 10am tomorrow (funny thing is I made an offer to pay £5000 and for them to remove the default a long time ago but they totally refused).

 

Without meaning to be intrusive, what percentage of the outstanding amount does Egg's offer equate to??

 

Good luck for tommorow and will be watching the outcome with interest!!

[e_inspired]

Without meaning to be intrusive, what percentage of the outstanding amount does Egg's offer equate to??

 

Good luck for tommorow and will be watching the outcome with interest!!

 

Thanks!!! no problem, I think it works out at 45%, they have taken off the PPI and the PPI interest. So its as if I never had the PPI and the payments I made reduced the principle loan.

[e_inspired]

The matter did not get heard we made a deal, I pay £6,000 @ £250per month and they remove the default all starting on or before the 14th of April.

 

I word of advice before you hire a barrister under public access, arrange a meeting first just to see what they think your prospects are. The reason I say this is because the barrister seemed to have his creditor biased hat on (he also works for creditors), he thought I should take the original £8,500 offer, I refused then they came back with £7,000, he was like thats a very good offer and if they win with costs etc I would pay over £20,000, I said no deal.. then they came back with £6,500.. no deal oh by the way the instalments they wanted was £300 (no way in hell I could afford that)... I said £6,000 @ £250 take it or leave it (hoping they would reject it).

 

The irony is that the creditors barrister after we had signed the tomlin, said he thought based on my ealier skeleton he I had a good chance of winning.. I just lost my nerve.

 

When we told the DJ that we had reached an agreement he commented that he was looking foward to this case all morning, he was a little bit dissapointed.

 

So many maybes.. maybe I shouldn't have hired the barrister.. maybe I should have stuck to my £5,000 offer... maybe I shouldn't have agreed to anything... who knows.. in any case I thank God that it is over.

 

So it ends, a victory of sorts the DN is going... but I didn't get to test anything in court.

 

Or does it.. I am thinking they owe me over £7000 in missold PPI (credit card and this loan), tomlin makes no mention that I can't try n get PPI back or talk about case etc.......;-)

 

 

 

B e_inspired

 

Sorry for any typos.

[WelshMam2009]

It's all nerve racking e-inspired...and well done on achieving an outcome that SUITED YOU!!

[militantconsumer]

And thanks for sharing it with the rest of us, it's great info.

[N.P]

e inspired,

 

Did you still have to pay your Barrister? Because if so, your giving him £900 for nothing?

[e_inspired]

e inspired,

 

Did you still have to pay your Barrister? Because if so, your giving him £900 for nothing?

 

Yep, he got ~£900 for nothing (paid upfront), I think he forgot what side he was supposed to be working for.. he just kept saying well you had the money blah blah blah.. its a good deal..blah blah blah.. whatever you decide but I think its a good offer blah blah blah.

 

He did say one useful thing, if I couldn't maintain the payment agreed in the tomlin that I should speak to egg if they don't reduce it, I could apply to the court to get it varied.

 

Maybe its best this way, had I won, yes I would have not had to pay anything.. I might even have got a little money by the way of costs, but the default would have still been on my file till june 2012.

[N.P]

Yep, he got ~£900 for nothing (paid upfront), I think he forgot what side he was supposed to be working for.. he just kept saying well you had the money blah blah blah.. its a good deal..blah blah blah.. whatever you decide but I think its a good offer blah blah blah.

 

He did say one useful thing, if I couldn't maintain the payment agreed in the tomlin that I should speak to egg if they don't reduce it, I could apply to the court to get it varied.

 

Maybe its best this way, had I won, yes I would have not had to pay anything.. I might even have got a little money by the way of costs, but the default would have still been on my file till june 2012.

 

 

 

Hi again e_inspired,

 

Well, going from that statement, maybe he though you were an easy catch and an easy earner. Perhaps you would have been better off on your own and sticking to your plan. It certainly makes you think that maybe Egg have used that particular Barrister before, the one you had.

 

Wether or not you had the money or not is totaly irrelevent. You employed him for his services and he basically didn`t deliver the goods. He was supposed to defend you. Murderers and rapists get a better defence than that.

 

Oh well, I don`t suppose there`s anything I can add to this, other than as long as your happy with the outcome, that`s all that matters really.

 

Certainly makes you think why these companies offer a reduced payback if they are so sure of their claim though.

 

Having a Default is not so bad really, depending on which way you look at it. At least it stops you getting trapped into more debt.

 

Regards

 

 

N.P

[WelshMam2009]

I am always dubious of Counsel who work for both Claimants and Defendants.

 

Whilst, in theory there should be no conflict, as professional ethics dictate, NP may well be right and the barrister's potential repeat business with Egg is worth far more than your one off commission e-inspired.

 

It also gives them an insight in to defendant's legal arguments that they can then possibly use in the next case whilst working for the claimant!!

[e_inspired]

And so my friends it ends. I took Egg to court over the PPI and today we settled, I am not allowed to revel the terms of the settlement but I am reasonably happy.

 

So in conclusion default removed, and all outstanding liabilites to egg settled.

 

The link below has doc's related to the case:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/egg/219582-egg-card-question.html

 

B e_inspired

[citizenB]

Have linked from another thread. I am pleased you have settled this to your satisfaction.

 

I will amend your thread title and pop a link in the PPI success forums.

[risingsun]

The following might help:

 

OFT Rulings - Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 2004 sections: 9.3, 9.4, 9.5 & 9.6which further clarifies their view

 

 

OFT Rulings - Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 2004

 

9.3 What if PPI is financed by credit?

 

If PPI is linked to a credit agreement, and is to be financed as part of that agreement, there are effectively two credit agreements – one for the principal credit and another to finance the PPI.

 

The credit financing the PPI will generally be a debtor-creditor-supplier (d-c-s) agreement within s12(b) CCA. If the principal credit agreement is also d-c-s within s12(b) there will be a single credit agreement for the purposes of the Act as they are in the same statutory category.

 

If however the principal credit agreement is debtor-creditor (d-c), or d-c-s within s12(a) or ©, there will be a multiple agreement for the purposes of s18 CCA – see Q9.4.

The consumer should always have the option of paying for PPI by cash, rather than credit. This applies even if the PPI is mandatory. A cash price should therefore be shown for PPI in all cases.

 

9.4 How should a multiple agreement with PPI be categorised?

 

In the OFT’s view, where PPI is to be financed by credit under the principal agreement, and falls within Reg 2 (a) – see Q9.10 – there will generally be a ‘unitary multi-part’ agreement, see Q2.23. This is irrespective of whether the PPI is mandatory or optional. The same also applies in the OFT’s view to contracts of shortfall insurance falling within Reg 2 (b), see Q2.25.

 

In other cases, the categorisation of a multiple agreement will depend upon the facts of each case – see Q2.21.

 

9.5 How should such agreements be documented?

 

In the OFT’s view, a ‘unitary multi-part’ agreement should be documented as though it were a single agreement but including under each sub-heading all required information and statements applicable to the individual ‘part agreements’ – see Q2.28.

 

Office of Fair Trading Consumer Credit (Agreements etc) Regs draft FAQs 98

Where Reg 2(9) applies, the agreements may be documented with a common heading and signature box and statements of protection and remedies – see Q9.12.

 

In the OFT’s view, financial and related particulars and other information should be shown both separately and together – see Q2.30. It should be made clear which information applies to the agreement as a whole and which to each ‘part agreement’ – see Q2.32. Where information is common to the agreements, see Q2.29.

 

9.6 What does this mean for PPI?

 

In the OFT’s view, where there is a ‘unitary multi-part’ agreement (see Q9.4) it is necessary to show financial and related particulars and other information both separately and together – see Q9.5.

 

This means that the financial and related particulars for the PPI credit should be stated separately from those for the principal credit agreement, but should also be shown in an aggregated form – see Q2.32.

 

The particulars would include the amount of credit and the cash price for the PPI. They would also include a description of the PPI, the timing and amounts of repayments and the total amount payable (where applicable). See also chapters 3 and 4.

 

 

Separate repayment terms for the two agreements and repayment terms are prescribed terms in Schedule 6 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983

 

Schedule 6 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983

schedule 6 column 2 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and are inter alia:

A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or that there is no credit limit, a term stating the rate of any interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement and a term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following—

 

1.Number of repayments;

2.Amount of repayments;

3.Frequency and timing of repayments;

4.Dates of repayments;

5.The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable

 

Best of luck!

 

Does anyone have a copy I could download of this oft ruling...thanks!

[web2dude]

This is all the copy you need to include in any letter or response. Hope that helps.

 

Web2dude

[MandM]

So could any of this be useful on an Egg CARD PPI claim?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/payment-protection-insurance-ppi/245111-mandm-egg-card-ppi.html

 

Thanks,

 

M