Inaccuracies do not automatically invalidate demands

[Legal Beagles]

In a number of recent cases, borrowers have produced a detailed forensic analysis of the accrual of interest on their accounts by lenders alleging that any error in the calculation of interest invalidates the demand made by the lender and any appointment of a receiver on foot thereof. The English case of*County Leasing Limited –v- […]

More...

[Amethyst]

Re: Inaccuracies do not automatically invalidate demands

Also http://www.mhc.ie/latest/insights/li...-demands#_ftn3

An interesting read

[righty]

Re: Inaccuracies do not automatically invalidate demands

What's the point of having rules when the judiciary are just going to ignore them a point that was raised in orbiter by LJ Hoffman in the matter Burke v American Express

[PAWS]

Re: Inaccuracies do not automatically invalidate demands

I can see your point Righty. I think what this should highlight is the need for caution when fighting ones case. Although I agree ‘rules are rules’ the more knowledge I gain from trawling through this site the more I realise I do not know. One thing for certain; when it comes to sub clauses,specifics and circumstances the law is, well, a law onto itself!

I think it is a warning to be aware and not just assume the rules of law are straightforward. :tsk:

[righty]

Re: Inaccuracies do not automatically invalidate demands

Any litigation is a gamble BUT its as well to put the court on notice that you expect them to adhere to the rules/regulations.

In a recent matter I myself, in a written case summary, quoted LJ Hoffman in this regard AND the court took it on board, Result a win