MBNA

[Guest]

Re: MBNA

I would suggest that you re-read sections 101,107,108, 138 and in particular section 234.4.

Please also note a fact you not saying here is that the claimants were the alleged debtors and the burden of proof fell to them.

And what the hell has Paul to do with this, he has left this forum because of your behaviour.

Garlok
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Of course Angry Cat, but telling him to just cough up and get on with his life will also not encourage him to come here for advice and support either.

regards
Garlok

Thanks read them and still see frequent mentions of section 127 which is an unenforceability via section65 issue.

I think you may have trouble with comprehension the paul we have been discussing is not PT. And anyway he left entirely of his own volition. Which he has every right to do.
I dont think he would run away from me.Is that what you are suggesting. No seccond thoughts scratch that dont want to know.
Peter

[Differentjudge]

Re: MBNA

Guys......... stop this

it is one thing giving difering opinions and balanced arguments but what you are doing is bickering and trying to point score......

not helpful to any one

[basa48]

Re: MBNA

This is a quote from wakesman, were you readig another judjment.

229. Mrs Thompson says that such an inference can and should be made. She referred me to paragraph
2.9.4 of the OFT Draft Guidance. What this says is that often consumers and their advisers assume that if a signed copy is not provided it necessarily means that the agreement cannot be enforced either under s78 or under sl27 (3). But this overlooks the fact that there is no obligation to produce a copy of the signature and that "sl27 (3) does not apply merely because a signed document is not available at the court hearing; the section requires that a document containing the Prescribed Terms "was" signed by the debtor...The creditor may be able to provide evidence that its practice was always to require a signature and that its agreements
always complied with section 61 (1) (a) and the debtor ...may be unable to satisfy the court that he or she did not sign an agreement." I do not see how that passage helps Mrs Thompson on this application.

Peter

The problem with quoting Carey like this is it overlooks the fact that the debtors were the claimants. It was for the debtor to show that there was no signed compliant agreement. Not easy to prove something doesn't exist!!

It is common policy now (I hope) for debtors NOT to sue creditors. This puts the onus of proving there is a signed compliant agreement on the creditor when suing a debtor. Again difficult when there may not be one - especially if the debtor asserts strongly s/he never signed one.

[Garlok]

Re: MBNA

I am afraid you have me wrong DJ. I couldn't care less about point scoring. The OP was told by one poster to just cough up and get a life. A stance he has taken with others on other forums. The OP is in serious trouble has been frightened away yet again without any of us gettoing to the real facts of the case.

Is that what you want LB to be known for, "P**s Off and get a life?" I don't think so. However it is beginning to appear that way. It seems that like CAG only one person's views count and just remember he does NOT sit on the Queens Bench.

Some of us are not here using our time voluntarily to massage our egos and I should also point out that I have agreed with AC and hoped that the OP would return to look at reasoned opinions on all fronts for him to come to a decision on which way he should proceed. Unhappily another inervention of the wrong kind has degenerated this thread in the hope that it will be closed down.

Look at the history across a number of forums.

Dan come back there are some really good sensible folk on here who are capable of holding more than one bigotted view!

regards
Garlok

[Sapphire]

Re: MBNA

Please guys stop trying to belittle each other, its not big and its certainly not clever, you'd be better off using your energies to help people rather than keep having childish arguments. It now got past being entertaining and is now very, very boring.

If you really, really are intent on having an argument then we can arrange for one of you or all of you all to visit the kennels and you can have it out in there, just pm me if you want access and I can arrange it.

Otherwise just leave it out please.

Back on topic now.

[Garlok]

Re: MBNA

You don't have to bother Sapphy. I have already made my feelings plain about the poster concerned to admin and of cetelco's biased support for him.

Perhaps as an expert in all things including having more knowledge than a High Court Judge he would like with his aggressive and nasty way of conducting himself take over the end of life and bereavement issues?

Cause I won't be bothering again. LB's motto " Cough up, P**s Off and get a life"

pt2537 was correct.

regards
Garlok

[Amethyst]

Re: MBNA

Garlok,

If you read the posts, fully, from the beginning of the thread, and argue the points without bringing personal feelings about other posters into the equation you could have a sensible, constructive discussion. Try and see both view points, there is a middle ground which will help defendants, you just have to find it. The OP has actually given very little information about his case and the documentation he has been provided with by MBNA and that is needed to advise properly on his specific case.

LB always tries to advise specific to an individuals exact situation and what is most suitable for them. Some times that will be to fight your butt off, and sometimes that will be know when to stop. It is not one sided. Read Paul's thread (simply as it has been mentioned and it does show that despite advising him at the start I didn't feel he had much of a chance once we had discussed his particular situation and case we did all possible to assist him get the full picture before deciding he needed professional assistance with his case) - Frisps case similarly.

Just be careful that you are not the one who becomes one sided.

Ame
xx

[basa48]

Re: MBNA

Some times that will be to fight your butt off, and sometimes that will be know when to stop. It is not one sided.
Ame
xx

My feelings are that the one particular poster never seems to offer positive advice how to tackle a creditor.

It always seems to be that a particular argument is invalid and they should agree to make payments.

It's almost that the CCA was written to protect the creditors and the courts will always interpret in favour of the bankers.

It maybe s/he is a particularly cautious individual, but sometimes you need to stick your head above the parapet as I have done to good effect (at least for now)!

[Amethyst]

Re: MBNA

When you have been involved with assisting a number of people who have gone full throttle into fighting using CCA issues, often inappropriately, and seen the effects on their lives, and detrimental impact on their finances, which could have been avoided, then it does make you a lot more cautious in advising others to follow the same route unless you have all the details of the case and there is a bonafide argument which will stand up. I have posted numerous times on the subject and always said some arguments are fine for those who have nothing to lose or the more confident trailblazers among us, but care should always be taken advising people to take untested, uncertain and potentially costly routes through the courts. Harping on about it but Paul's thread is a perfect example, he basically said he wanted to fight and had nothing to lose and would be quite happy to be bankrupted by it. Just make sure people go in with their eyes wide open then there is no problem. If you search on here on my posts for 'trailblazers' you'll probably find what I said previously and my feelings on that haven't changed.

Can we move some of these posts which aren't specifically discussing dan's case to a discussion thread ? - it might help with the big picture if we can have a reasoned discussion on this side of things - but as it isn't directly related to the OP's particular case here might not be the place to do it. I'd also like to catch up on any recent cases since the beginning of April as I have been out of touch for a few weeks (eg what's the current situation with Brandon & Durkin now?)

What do you think?

[Garlok]

Re: MBNA

I do not wish to prolong this BUT you know mine and others feelings on these matters. Thsi is yet another thread where an unwarranted intervention was made when people were trying firstly to advise the OP on what facts he had given, secondly to ask him for further information whilst opinions were being swapped with what we had.

I am not at all surprised that the OP has gone away. I hope he comes back or goes and talks to someone who really knows what they are doing.

But to be told basically "cough up and go get a life" is defintiely not the way to inspire confidence. This site has told me by its inactions and actions ( and being mislead as to its intentions at the beginning) what it really thinks. I don't give a damn about little green buttons, take 'em away if you wish. I will have done my job if I have relieved someone less fortunate than me of one minutes worth of pain through end of life issues, DCA unlawful activity, guided someone through the minefield of F & F despite some pretty bad thinking on here, or have prevented someone paying one more pound than they are legally required to do. I don't need thanks or recognition for doing that. I have the scars for going through it personally.

Yes I have a lot to learn but no one knows it all despite their own egotistical approach and the support they get.

Like I said " cough up, P**s Off and get a life"

Have you asked about for example a really good debator on litigation on here and CAG whom you have not heard from for a while who would knock your favoured ones into a cocked hat.

If you are the caring altruistic bunch you claim, perhaps you had better ask.

Garlok

[Amethyst]

Re: MBNA

Green buttons ?

(sorry am reading the rest just don't know what you mean by that bit)

[Garlok]

Re: MBNA

Try line four of the header.

Garlok

[Amethyst]

Re: MBNA

Ummm, sorry Garlok, I'm being dense but still don't know.

What PB actually said was ''contact the creditor and arrange a repayment plan you can afford and get on with your life'' so I don't really think it's fair to shorten that to 'p*ss off, pay up and get a life' is it ? I did actually ask the OP if he had spoken to MBNA about repayments on my first post in the thread too.

[Amethyst]

Re: MBNA

I also don't know who you are talking about ref CAG, sorry.

[Garlok]

Re: MBNA

I will PM you the situation with this member.

Garlok