Court Claim - Arrow Global / Marks & Spencer - 30-7-2015

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Court Claim - Arrow Global / Marks & Spencer - 30-7-2015

Thanks for this... it wasn't a store card turned into a credit card. M&S card is different to the Personal Reserve account -
It was a drawdown credit facitlity with a credit limit and cheque book - no bank or current account. M&S set a credit limit and you paid yourself a cheque when you wanted to use the lending facility. Minimum monthly payments on the outstanding balance - like a credit card account, with the option to pay off as much or as little (subject to the minimum monthly payment) as you like.

Oh yes, I'm well acquainted with those M&S reserve accounts as well. Thanks for clarifying what it was. :yo: :yo: That being the case, the case I quoted above wouldn't apply here but there's another one that certainly does and @pt2537 was also involved: http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...Global-Limited :bounce:

So the Arrow Global matter, well they lost as is to be expected but the manner of the defeat was pleasing.

The Client had taken out a M&S Charge card in about 1995, a while later the client was offered the chance of a “Flexible reserve account” which in essence is a credit token account which provides an amount of credit where you can draw down up to your credit limit by writing yourself a cheque.

I have received a response today from Arrow together with my £1 postal order, who say it has arisen from an overdraft facility and therefore doesn' t fall under the CCA request?

I have uploaded the document and as they are not going to provide me with any of the information, proof or documents.. I don't know what to do to enter my defense?

I just LOVE IT! :whoo: Those guys just never learn, do they? If you read further down that blog post you'll find the following: :music:

The Claimants argument, and this is a peach, is that the agreement isnt regulated because its a overdraft?@????

Well a few problems there, firstly its not an overdraft, M&S own website records confirm this, secondly an overdraft needs a current account to be sustained, you cannot have an overdraft without a current account, thirdly, the account couldnt hold a credit balance so therefore it couldnt be an overdraft.

Despite having LOST that case in court precisely over that argument, they are still sending out letters saying the account is an overdraft! :crazy: Unf*ng believable! :eek2:

The conclusion of the case is quoted below: :music:

So we go to trial, the judge rules the agreement is irredeemably unenforceable, helpfully the statement we had said “Just ring us and we will give you credit” thus no signed agreement any way, and the Judge also ruled there was non compliance with s78 and basically Arrow never had a hope.

We also argued that we should be entitled to recover the costs for the client who was out of pocket. The judge disagreed to begin with but once Tom Brennan made his submissions it was game over, the judge agreed the Claimants conduct was so bad that they should pay the costs. One of Toms points was that they were claiming they didnt need to comply with s78 CCA which was plainly wrong and they knew it was wrong from their own documents but they still maintained the argument anyway.

:grin: :grin: :grin: