• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

    Originally posted by andy58 View Post
    What effect do we think this judgment has on the issue of general damages, following a proven incorrectly placed notice.

    Is there any more likelihood that an English court will accept an unspecified damages claim following the £8000 awarded here.

    The SC seemed not to either approve or disprove the Scottish award, but there again they did not rule it out. Would this be persuasive in lower court claims. I am unsure.
    I thought the judgment was pretty clear, to quote:

    "Damages resulting from HFC’s breach of its duty of care are
    confined to injury to Mr Durkin’s credit in the sum of £8,000."

    They expressly stated they could not consider the elements of actual loss that had been alleged, this means the SC awarded £8,000 + interest for the mere act of 'Injury to credit'


    Again, comments above are not meant to be derogatary, just how I see the thing (albeit simplistic) and I guess the only way we'll really find out is when someone puts it all into practice!


    Comment


    • Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

      Originally posted by ncf355 View Post
      I thought the judgment was pretty clear, to quote:

      "Damages resulting from HFC’s breach of its duty of care are
      confined to injury to Mr Durkin’s credit in the sum of £8,000."

      They expressly stated they could not consider the elements of actual loss that had been alleged, this means the SC awarded £8,000 + interest for the mere act of 'Injury to credit'


      Again, comments above are not meant to be derogatary, just how I see the thing (albeit simplistic) and I guess the only way we'll really find out is when someone puts it all into practice!


      Yes it was, but the £8000 was awarded in the Scottish Court not by the SC. It was also not contested.

      In previous lower court cases here this figure and even the concept of general losses on an action of this nature have been disregarded.

      Comment


      • Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

        Originally posted by ncf355 View Post
        SC awarded £8,000 + interest for the mere act of 'Injury to credit'
        That's as good as it gets. Based on other folk being screwed for a few days as opposed to decades.

        Thanks for all the support.

        I hope I can get back most of my expenses.

        It would be nice to be able to fire a defamation claim at HFC next.

        Cheers for now.

        Rico.

        Comment


        • Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

          Originally posted by ncf355 View Post
          I thought the judgment was pretty clear, to quote:

          "Damages resulting from HFC’s breach of its duty of care are
          confined to injury to Mr Durkin’s credit in the sum of £8,000."

          They expressly stated they could not consider the elements of actual loss that had been alleged, this means the SC awarded £8,000 + interest for the mere act of 'Injury to credit'


          Again, comments above are not meant to be derogatary, just how I see the thing (albeit simplistic) and I guess the only way we'll really find out is when someone puts it all into practice!


          I'm in absolute agrement with you there nfc.......what I see the judgement makes clear is that it backs and supports the Wilson V First Counties case.wherein Lord Birkenhead said that any Adverse /Detrimental information recorded on a persons credit file causes IMMEDIATE damage and the Judges in Durkin supported that view and ruling.......it is mentioned in the Judgement transcript........it has shown that ....in my opinion...... that the least amount of damage award for this type of damage is £8,000.
          But any further loss must be pleaded and proven.


          The other thing is even if a default is correctly entered because of the debtors fault......it is not meant ( as they say) to assist other potential lenders/creditors to assess an applicants credit status ....it is MEANT to damage a persons reputaion as we all agree entering a default is not enforcement of an agreement some creditors enter defaults for sums that would not be worth them taking the person to Court to recover monies owed....so they use the damage tactic ..which IMO is malicious.
          A correctly entered default causes the same damage as an incorrect one

          Sparkie
          Last edited by Sparkie1723; 27th March 2014, 14:52:PM.

          Comment


          • Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

            Originally posted by Rico View Post
            That's as good as it gets. Based on other folk being screwed for a few days as opposed to decades.

            Thanks for all the support.

            I hope I can get back most of my expenses.

            It would be nice to be able to fire a defamation claim at HFC next.

            Cheers for now.

            Rico.
            Hi Rico, Not what I was hoping for you .but have a think about using Section 140 of the CCA.It gives the Court the powers to re-open a credit agreement...and if you say under section 140B (9)that you lost X amount of pounds...... it is up to the creditor to prove you didn't......section 140B (9) puts the boot on the other foot if you get my meaning.

            Spar kie

            Comment


            • Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

              And do we think then that a contested claim for unspecified general damages of £8000 on the misplacement of a default marker would be successful here ?

              Comment


              • Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

                Originally posted by Rico View Post
                That's as good as it gets. Based on other folk being screwed for a few days as opposed to decades.

                Thanks for all the support.

                I hope I can get back most of my expenses.

                It would be nice to be able to fire a defamation claim at HFC next.

                Cheers for now.

                Rico.
                I must say Rico I do not know how you managed to deal with this for such an age - in my books you're a hero.

                Comment


                • Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

                  Originally posted by andy58 View Post
                  And do we think then that a contested claim for unspecified general damages of £8000 on the misplacement of a default marker would be successful here ?
                  I think it would andy if argued properly Richards ruling fully supports Wilson and Khopraror rulings that the damge does not have to be proven as Lord Birkenhead said its immediate ....

                  Sparkie

                  Comment


                  • Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

                    Hi Rico,

                    well done for all your efforts, I feel you really need the utmost congratulations for your determination in this

                    I for one would be more than happy to contribute to your costs from any wins I make from this supporting judgment

                    Comment


                    • Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

                      Originally posted by andy58 View Post
                      And do we think then that a contested claim for unspecified general damages of £8000 on the misplacement of a default marker would be successful here ?
                      The SC allowed £8K for injury to credit, surely the lower courts will allow the same?

                      Comment


                      • Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

                        Originally posted by ncf355 View Post
                        Hi Rico,

                        well done for all your efforts, I feel you really need the utmost congratulations for your determination in this

                        I for one would be more than happy to contribute to your costs from any wins I make from this supporting judgment
                        Me too.

                        Maybe the site team could think about this?

                        Comment


                        • Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

                          Originally posted by Sparkie1723 View Post
                          I think it would andy if argued properly Richards ruling fully supports Wilson and Khopraror rulings that the damge does not have to be proven as Lord Birkenhead said its immediate ....

                          Sparkie
                          There has of course been Smeaton vs Equafax and Haliday which directly opposed general damage awards, and distinguished Khopraror as being not relevant.

                          I think that this case would have to introduce a new element, perhaps it does, I am just unsure of whether it would be considered persuasive with it being a Scottish uncontested claim.

                          Comment


                          • Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

                            Sorry LA not sure how you mean, we'd be happy to pass on specific donations to Rico if that is what you mean ?
                            #staysafestayhome

                            Any support I provide is offered without liability, if you are unsure please seek professional legal guidance.

                            Received a Court Claim? Read >>>>> First Steps

                            Comment


                            • Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

                              Originally posted by andy58 View Post
                              There has of course been Smeaton vs Equafax and Haliday which directly opposed general damage awards, and distinguished Khopraror as being not relevant.

                              I think that this case would have to introduce a new element, perhaps it does, I am just unsure of whether it would be considered persuasive with it being a Scottish uncontested claim.

                              However, Wilson v First Counties was ruled under English Law.

                              Sparkie

                              Comment


                              • Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

                                Originally posted by andy58 View Post
                                There has of course been Smeaton vs Equafax and Haliday which directly opposed general damage awards, and distinguished Khopraror as being not relevant.

                                I think that this case would have to introduce a new element, perhaps it does, I am just unsure of whether it would be considered persuasive with it being a Scottish uncontested claim.
                                It is a Scottish claim that has been upheld in the Supreme court which now carries full weight in all English courts surely??

                                The Supreme Court has upheld the £8000 reward for simple injury to credit worthiness

                                Comment

                                View our Terms and Conditions

                                LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

                                If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


                                If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
                                Working...
                                X