Egg PAPLOC Now Claimform Loan - DLC final straits / SETTLED

[e_inspired]

The following might help:

 

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

 

 

Thanks for this web2dude.

 

My agreement is date april 2004 so the rulings don't apply to my agreement.

 

"1.8 What if an agreement is entered into before 31 May 2005?

If a regulated agreement is executed before 31 May 2005, it is subject to the 1983 Regulations but not the 2004 Regulations. If it is executed after that date, but is signed by one or more parties before then, it may benefit from transitional provisions – see Q1.9."

 

Any ideas how you would use the info in the doc for pre 31 may 2005 agreements? any ideas would be welcome.

[e_inspired]

due to time constraints placed upon me by work, i can only answer this point

 

It is irrelevent that you can calculate it from the figures, it was parliaments will that the TTC and TAP were incorperated into the agreement( See Consumer Credit Agreement Regulations 1983 Schedule 1)

 

point out that it is to be made clear so that the true cost of borrowing and its constituent parts are made clear to the consumer , who is most likely to be a layperson of little legal experience

 

to quote Lombard tricity Finance and Paton it is a "Childs Handbook" so if the regs say its gotta be there it has to be there

 

furthermore, how many people carry a calculator to a place when you are going to sign up for finance? not many id guess it is a very bad point the Barrister makes

 

Hi pt2537,

 

Thanks for taking the time out to look my thread .

 

If there are any authorities that relate to any of the points I have raised, I would be very gratful if you could point me in the right direction so I can do my research. I have roughly 21 days to prepare my argument.

 

Thanks again.

[Can't Pay]

Have you considered using a barrister on the new direct access scheme. You can instruct a barrister directly without using a solicitor. I instructed a guy from 5 Pump Court. He argued successfully that my executed agreement did not contain the prescribed terms, and the court set it aside. He saved me about £6,000 in debt and legal fees. His fee was restricted because it was on the fast track.

[Can't Pay]

There was an issue about multiple agreement aswell, he relied on a case called Heath v Southern Pacific Mortgages. Hope this helps.

Edited February 19, 2009 by Can't Pay
Repeating what was in before

[atwozee]

My agreement is date april 2004 so the rulings don't apply to my agreement.

 

Your agreement was always subject to s18 of the CCA 1974 – the OFT ruling just confirms it.

Egg drew up the contract not you – the loan amounts are for different purposes – each of the loans need the minimum terms to be compliant with schedule 6 of the 1983 regs.

In your case the repayment terms cannot be said to be correct because they are combined together and not separated – in cases where the schedule 6 terms are misstated and s127(3) applies then the agreement should be deemed unenforceable.

[e_inspired]

Have you considered using a barrister on the new direct access scheme. You can instruct a barrister directly without using a solicitor. I instructed a guy from 5 Pump Court. He argued successfully that my executed agreement did not contain the prescribed terms' date=' and the court set it aside. He saved me about £6,000 in debt and legal fees. His fee was restricted because it was on the fast track.[/quote']

 

What a GREAT suggestion. I am going to explore this in more detail Thanks!!!

[N.P]

Have you considered using a barrister on the new direct access scheme. You can instruct a barrister directly without using a solicitor. I instructed a guy from 5 Pump Court. He argued successfully that my executed agreement did not contain the prescribed terms' date=' and the court set it aside. He saved me about £6,000 in debt and legal fees. His fee was restricted because it was on the fast track.[/quote']

 

 

Hi CP,

 

What exactly is the difference between a Barrister and a Solicitor? I`ve never really looked into this.

 

Where would one go to find out about this option?

[Can't Pay]

I think a barrister is a specialist in his area whereas a solicitor deals with general matters. A solicitor if he does not know the answer will refer to a barrister. A barrister (I think) is the only one that can appear in court. I did a google search of "public access barrister", and I used 5 Pump Court who were quite high up. The barrister I used specialised in consumer credit. I am in no way an expert on what a solicitor or barrister does, a friend of mine told me about this scheme when I mentioned I was being sued by egg. I sent my papers to the barrister, and he gave me advice represented me in court and we won. Because we won, egg had to pay my costs !!!!!!! It took all the stress out of it, he did all the talking and the Judge took my case seriously, as opposed to when I was representing myself at the management hearings where the Judge thought I was trying it on.

[atwozee]

I think a barrister is a specialist in his area whereas a solicitor deals with general matters. A solicitor if he does not know the answer will refer to a barrister. A barrister (I think) is the only one that can appear in court. I did a google search of "public access barrister"' date=' and I used 5 Pump Court who were quite high up. The barrister I used specialised in consumer credit. I am in no way an expert on what a solicitor or barrister does, a friend of mine told me about this scheme when I mentioned I was being sued by egg. I sent my papers to the barrister, and he gave me advice represented me in court and we won. Because we won, egg had to pay my costs !!!!!!! It took all the stress out of it, he did all the talking and the Judge took my case seriously, as opposed to when I was representing myself at the management hearings where the Judge thought I was trying it on.[/quote']

 

What type of agreement was it and what was your defence.

Just interested in how you won – it would be nice to know the argument the barrister used.

[Can't Pay]

An egg card and ppi. He argued that it did not contain the prescribed terms and did not comply with multiple agreement provisions. Judge accepted first but not second. PPI had been paid back already so did not matter.

[atwozee]

Any chance of posting up a copy of the agreement so others can compare – minus any personal details of course.

[pt2537]

I think a barrister is a specialist in his area whereas a solicitor deals with general matters. A solicitor if he does not know the answer will refer to a barrister. A barrister (I think) is the only one that can appear in court. I did a google search of "public access barrister"' date=' and I used 5 Pump Court who were quite high up. The barrister I used specialised in consumer credit. I am in no way an expert on what a solicitor or barrister does, a friend of mine told me about this scheme when I mentioned I was being sued by egg. I sent my papers to the barrister, and he gave me advice represented me in court and we won. Because we won, egg had to pay my costs !!!!!!! It took all the stress out of it, he did all the talking and the Judge took my case seriously, as opposed to when I was representing myself at the management hearings where the Judge thought I was trying it on.[/quote']

 

Slightly incorrect,

 

Firstly, I have a right of audience in court, so it is solicitors and barristers who can appear in court but Barristers can appear before all courts even the Lords

 

barristers are more specialised in certain cases but it does not always follow

 

costs are probably the biggest difference, barristers are a lot dearer as i charge £110 per hour and a Barrister will most likely be double that

 

if you want a barrister there are many ways of getting one, you may wish to consider the Bar Pro Bono department as they give you free access to legal assistence without costs

[Can't Pay]

Sorry put papers in the bin as soon as I got home, had enough of the whole thing. It was an egg credit card agreement signed in April 2003. Just read pt2537's response, thank you for correction. In relation to costs I paid £690 plus VAT to the barrister for the trial (fixed by court), included a brief telephone advice and skeleton argument as well. I contacted various solicitor's they wanted at least £500 on account, then said they would instruct a barrister to do trial, presumably I would have paid the £690 on top of that. I thought that the barrister option was good value for money. I had to sign an agreement before hand which limited his costs to the £690 plus VAT.

[N.P]

Thanks for the posts CP,

 

Some interesting points there. Seems that if you turned up on your own you don`t get taken seriously, yet it you had a suit with you then things are different. Why is that? Don`t Judge`s like LIP`s?

 

How much would you charge for a hearing PT?

[N.P]

One more thing CP, how did you pay for the Barrister?

 

Was it cash up front or installments etc?

[pt2537]

Thanks for the posts CP,

 

Some interesting points there. Seems that if you turned up on your own you don`t get taken seriously, yet it you had a suit with you then things are different. Why is that? Don`t Judge`s like LIP`s?

 

How much would you charge for a hearing PT?

Mate, you are really putting me on the spot

 

to answer in the truthful way, i do not charge the client a penny!!

 

all of my costs are recovered from the other side without question as i do not take money from those who cannot afford it. that is the whole ethic of what i do,

 

we work on what is called a Conditional Fee agreement which is basically no win no fee. we recover all our costs from the other side

[N.P]

Mate, you are really putting me on the spot

 

to answer in the truthful way, i do not charge the client a penny!!

 

all of my costs are recovered from the other side without question as i do not take money from those who cannot afford it. that is the whole ethic of what i do,

 

we work on what is called a Conditional Fee agreement which is basically no win no fee. we recover all our costs from the other side

 

 

 

Mmmmmm, I never meant to put you on the spot bud, I was just asking out of interest. Ya could have said it was a private matter between you and your clients, heh heh

 

I was just wondering, as I might require your services some time, as I`ve had another letter from another bunch of cranks regarding Lloyds TSB again, this morning. And then there`s Argos and Egg, when they start

[bgqs]

It would have been cash upfront knowing legal types !

[pt2537]

It would have been cash upfront knowing legal types !

Never ever would i charge an upfront fee.

 

It sickens me that people are being asked to pay for help at the point when they can least afford it

[bgqs]

Exactly....however, you are one of a few mate !

[Fingers60]

Hey PT, I tried PMing ya but your inbox full

 

I want to appoint a solicitor to handle my claims going forward, could you recomend?

 

cheers

 

Fingers

[alanfromderby]

Unfortunately we cannot "recommend" companies as this could cause us legal problems. Various companies are discussed on the site, and a search on their name should give you an idea of their reputation.

[nosnibor]

Hi e inspired

I’m another cagger with one of these egg agreements, just subbing and wishing you good luck

[e_inspired]

Hi e inspired

 

I’m another cagger with one of these egg agreements, just subbing and wishing you good luck

 

Thank you .

 

Ok, so now I have got myself a big bad barrister.. costing me (hopefully them) nearly £900 including VAT.

 

D' day is the 25 of march the hearing is listed with a time estimate of 2hrs.

 

 

I will report back whatever the outcome.

[militantconsumer]

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.