**CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

[Noah]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

IMHO

As the claimant did not (I suspect could not) fully comply with the CCA request, the alleged debt is unenforceable. If unenforceable, then does not Grace & Anor v Black Horse kick in?
It's unenforceable until the claimant complies, which may be never.

My understanding of that was it was only valid if the agreement had been judged irredeemably unenforceable

[nemesis45]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

IMHO

As the claimant did not (I suspect could not) fully comply with the CCA request, the alleged debt is unenforceable. If unenforceable, then does not Grace & Anor v Black Horse kick in?
It's unenforceable until the claimant complies, which may be never.

I think Charity if the Agreement and the data to create a compliant reconstituted agreement is stated to no longer exist the that makes the debt irredeemably unenforceable.

nem

[charitynjw]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

My understanding of that was it was only valid if the agreement had been judged irredeemably unenforceable

I think Charity if the Agreement and the data to create a compliant reconstituted agreement is stated to no longer exist the that makes the debt irredeemably unenforceable.

nem

The question of a 'temporarily unenforceable' agreement was not addressed in Grace.

However, logic would have it that an agreement, once it becomes unenforceable, remains so until it becomes enforceable.

Ergo, to put it on a CRA file is unfair re the DPA 1998

Or am I barking up the wrong tree?

[nemesis45]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

The question of a 'temporarily unenforceable' agreement was not addressed in Grace.

However, logic would have it that an agreement, once it becomes unenforceable, remains so until it becomes enforceable.

Ergo, to put it on a CRA file is unfair re the DPA 1998

Or am I barking up the wrong tree?

:lol:
No I don't thinks so Charity! but I suspect we'll have an ark full of all sort of opinions soon enough
nem

[beaconsman]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

I have no idea, I just disputed it online with noddle, they obviously agreed.

[beaconsman]

Re: **CASE CLOSED** Court Claim - Lowell/Vanquis - 15-1-2015

Noddle agreed, however Experian shows Lowlifes have STILL been reporting this account with it marked as (8) last updated 22-02-16. Balance however is £0 and marked as satisfied. Time to get this removed me thinks.