• 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.
  • LegalBeagles® is a free forum, founded in May 2007, providing legal guidance and support to consumers and SME's across a range of legal areas.

    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.
  • A free service which provides vulnerable consumers the ability to record their personal circumstances at a given point in time when they are looking to protect themselves against further debt or related financial problems. This is done either by self-exclusion from credit and financial promotions or to slow down the credit application process.
    Vulnerable consumers can register for FREE


    Check if the Debt Collection Agency/Debt Purchaser contacting you is using the VRS register.


Contra - carey v hsbc

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Contra - carey v hsbc

    It appears the following case : Blackshaw v MFS Portfolio Ltd [2016] EWHC 3708 (Ch)
    seems to contra Carey:
    The First Ground

    The Appellant argued that she did not receive the terms and conditions when she entered into the credit agreement and, accordingly, section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (“CCA”) had not been complied with and the agreement could not be enforced. The agreement had been entered in 1995 and, whilst it had provided a microfiche copy of the front page of the application, the Respondent had been unable to provide a copy of the terms.

    Despite the terms not being produced, the District Judge had found that, in the circumstances, it was very likely that such terms existed and would have been provided to the Appellant when she entered into the Agreement. Mr Justice Mann held that this was a finding that the District Judge was entitled to make. Further, Mr Justice Mann found that it was implicit from the District Judge’s findings that she considered that the terms and conditions not only existed but had been subscribed to by the Appellant’s signature and, consequently, the requirements of section 61 CCA were fulfilled. Mr Justice Mann held that this was also a justifiable finding which should not be interfered with on appeal.
    see here:
    Tags: None

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.




Help and support with all issues related to finances. If you’d like information on sources of free, regulated, debt help and advice you can visit the Money Advice Service. It's an independent service, set up by the government to help people make the most of their money.
See more
See less

Court Claim ?

Guides and Letters

Search and Compare fixed fee legal services and find a solicitor near you.

Find a Law Firm