Default Notices: time to remedy

[The Debt Star]

Re: Default Notices: time to remedy

At the back of my mind is a cynical thought that wonders whether this situation is engineered as being advantageous to the lender and an effective way of removing a significant number of less-then-perfect borrowers from the marketplace.

Its not cynical LA, its the truth, a bald statement of fact that creditors abuse due process. As do the CRAs.

[paulb2905]

Re: Default Notices: time to remedy

I appreciate your point of view Ame's but i think you have to consider the role of the courts in the wider social position.

The courts will usually be "clogged" up with whatever "social" problems are prevelant at the time, be it loan sharks in the 70's (hence Parliament enacted the CCA) to injury claims in the late 90's early 00's and anything in between.

Im sure we will see more "ambulance chasing" style claims as we move forward, perhaps more civil cases against criminals ie following the trend of the US courts. Although we have managed to, as yet, avoid huge class action style cases im sure its only a matter of time.

I understand your perspective from the Claims companies who "professed" to be able to wipe your debts out have left a bad taste and as a result "tainted" the perspective of many unfortunately including judges at all levels (who lets face it are in the main unlikely to be suffering this situation). I would applaud the Law Lords who have managed to "see to the heart" of the matter in prior rulings again, most likely, absent any actual experience of the situation.

But were stuck with the historical, adversarial, law system rather then the Scottish (insert French), inquisatorial, law system. And we are stuck with the way Statute is drafted in an overly complicated manner.

Is it therefore ok for the Banks etc to challenge the authority of the Governing Bodies as they feel that they have a case to argue - they have the resources to do this and its certainly permitted for them to do so, but is it right??

My opinion is that the Judges in many cases whether on purpose, or absent understanding of, the specifics of the Act have interpreted sections/sentences that do not require ANY interpretation due to the plain language used and as a result have impeached the Statute as intended by Parliament. (remember that it is not possible to defend oneself in any case as "not knowing" about the law). So who challenges these rulings under impeachment???

Jees, i sound like a real socialist or perhaps trotski-ist and thats far from the truth. What i do dislike is unfairness though.

Always remember that a verbal contract is only as good as the paper its written on and sometimes a written contract falls short of the requirements of both Statute and Contract law. Just because something is written into a contract doesnt make it legal or lawful.

[Amethyst]

Re: Default Notices: time to remedy

I dislike unfairness too hence being here, but i find it incredibly unfair that people have been so encouraged to bring such flimsy cases to court with huge costs risks, when they just wanted help with a claim against them. You aren't fussed I know as you are quite happy to go bankrupt, but lots of people just can't afford to have that risk against them, that they are blissfully unaware of a lot of the time. So yes people like yourself who dont care about going bankrupt, or people who have the money or circumstances to pay costs if they lose, can keep stomping up to the courts with the technicalities to get them sorted out for the masses (in the negative tho far too much).

Not where it costs people their relationships, health and nearly their homes ! That isnt the banks/lenders faults. Its the people who encourage defending bonafide debt claims with half a second out on a default notice technicalities, those who encourage people to stop paying on a whim, those who refuse to accept high court judges opinions and judgments with comments like ' must have been a dodgy judge' type comments....

rant alert x

[paulb2905]

Re: Default Notices: time to remedy

lol agreed on many points (inc the rant alert!!)

But it looks like what your really saying though is that you blame the bogus "claims" companies not really the "little" people who take the advice in "good faith"

The law is a double edged sword and often the pen (or printer) is mightier than the sword.

If it was a case involving 100's millions of pounds and i could afford to throw money at it on a "technicality" am i any less culpable, or entitled to, than a debtor owing £1000 applying the same technicality?? The only real difference is my ability to employ legal council to argue my point effectively - the technicality is still there regardless...........

[Amethyst]

Re: Default Notices: time to remedy

I agree, the technicalities are important, but misleading people that they are going to ditch the debts and be treated fairly suddenly because of it, is irresponsible. Tell people they are being trailblazers and trying a new thing out to clarify it for others and are risking a whack of costs if they lose, like you did on maer's thread yesterday, then fair enough, but the CMCs (sorry SOME CMC's) have made out its a done deal, when it sooooooooooooo is not.

I'm not saying I agree, but I am acknowledging that it is how it is. The few will try and change things, by forcing cases and appeals, or by squirelling away from the inside, and no it isnt fair that the many get caught in the crossfire, but it is how it is and all we can try and do is ensure the good cases can get through and the chaff stay at the door, for now.

(and I must qualify again I'm not talking about irredeemably unenforceable errors such as true mistated credit like that which causes interest to be charged on a deposit already paid etc as that is true detriment)

[middenmess]

Re: Default Notices: time to remedy

Amethyst

Now we're in the ridiculous position that people who claim unfair charges have a high court judgment against reclaiming so that is being shut down

Read more at: Legal Beagles Consumer Forum - Reply to Topic

I've lost my link to that judgement-can you oblige me with the link please?

[Amethyst]

Re: Default Notices: time to remedy

Amex v Brandon - think it is in VIP Case Law. Hang five.

Legal Beagles Consumer Forum


You really need the original judgment for the details but thats still under wraps until after the appeal in December.

47. And he went on to express his view that these were a genuine pre-estimate of
loss which is the test for liquidated damages and not a penalty. In my judgment that was a
view to which he was perfectly entitled to come.

[Lord_Alcohol]

Re: Default Notices: time to remedy

I disagree with that. This is far less than people being taken advantage of the banks but people attempting to take advantage of the law and the banks to sort out debt problems as it has been bandied about as a get out of debt free card, people have fallen for it/jumped at the chance, and rather than considering routes to sort the debts out at affordable rates over a longer period are trying it on with technicalities that in reality had no disadvantage on them whatsoever.

People are stopping paying on purpose. They are pushing the banks to take them to court.

Why tar everyone with the same brush? Really 100% of people fighting the banks are simply trying to avoid their debts? I'm not. I have been forced into this position because I cannot afford the full balance in one hit. I only have CCA as protection.

Look how many people we see on here that are in too deep with these type of argments, unable to demonstrate any detriment, that have been dumped by CMcs/other forums, and we have a massive struggle to try and get these people back to where they would have been had they just accepted they cocked up and took on too much and sorted out repayment at affordable rates in the first place.

In LA's case he could have paid the £2500 and argued the default notice was incorrect to get rid of the default, but decided, as he said himself, off the back of Woodchester, (so from reading forums and correct me if I am wrong LA) not to pay any of it.

That's a bit much isn't it Amethyst?

Why bother having a CCA forum on here if site team members take this view?

Yes, I could have paid the £2.5K but then faced the prospect of solicitors fees to defend when Egg came for the full amount. As they told me, I needed to pay over £2K more.

Also, I considered this to be fundamentally wrong and, as the contract was regulated, have looked to the regulations for protection. You seem to be saying that that is wrong.

Btw, I have made many offers to Egg to re-open the contract but they will have none of it. For them, it is pay everything now or we'll take you to court. Fair?

how many people have now doubled their debts in costs, incurred a mass of stress, and in cases years of effort, still result with a charge order and installments ? How many of those people could just have gone in with admissions and offers to pay and defend any actual detriment to them like unfair charges and extortionate interest and got themsleves installment rates straight off.

Now we're in the ridiculous position that people who claim unfair charges have a high court judgment against reclaiming so that is being shut down and anyone that mentions a consumer credit agreement is considered to be trying to avoid their debts.

Certainly agree with that!

[Amethyst]

Re: Default Notices: time to remedy

I'm not tarring everyone with the same brush at all LA, I'm just pointing out that the credit industry (and in a lot of ways the judicial system) is tarring everyone with the same brush, and in quite a lot of cases tha it is true and that is down to the CMCs in the main part. We have now to fight against that as well which makes it even harder to get fairly treated by the system.

I wasn't having a go at you and quoted your case as an example where things can go wrong. You mentioned you hadnt paid it because of Woodchester, I dont know the background behind that (hence asking you to confirm the reasons), and you have acknowledged had you paid the £2.5k regardless of the dn fault you would have had a much easier argument now for not having the D on your credit file. The bank are at fault with the faulty Dn and thats what the discussion is about, how to work around these faulty DNs (well I think it is anyway).

I also havent said it is fair. It is just the reality we are fighting against and we have to try do it without causing ourselves or others further detriment.

Like i have said, I'm not against using the CCA to sort debts out, but I am against people being encouraged into it unaware of the risks and difficulties involved (and it does happen) - otherwise I wouldnt be being part of these discussions.

[The Debt Star]

Re: Default Notices: time to remedy

I do share LAs frustration and am in similar situation.

[Amethyst]

Re: Default Notices: time to remedy

Trust me, I share everyones frustration, and in someways feel as well as trying to protect people from the actions of the banks, we are also trying to protect them from the CMCs, the forums and, when it comes down to it, themselves....being devils advocate isnt easy and isnt gratefully received, because I'd love to screw the *******s over big time as they are responsible for so much heartache, but like with bank charges, you have to make sure the cases that go through benefit people rather than cause further detriment, and that is why we took the very very hard decision to pull out of bank charge claims following a tough few months after the SCoj decision.

[Lord_Alcohol]

Re: Default Notices: time to remedy

Personally, I've been trying to get my two creditors to reinstate the ags using as a stick their various mistakes. I would like nothing better (apart from complete erasure of the debts!) than to have both these accounts back and my credit rating where it was before this started.

But I feel that the banks smell blood and can see that they can obtain everything they want if they find a compliant judge. For that reason (I think), they are not interested in any form of compromise.

At the end of the day, this is the real problem.

LA

[middenmess]

Re: Default Notices: time to remedy

Personally, I've been trying to get my two creditors to reinstate the ags using as a stick their various mistakes. I would like nothing better (apart from complete erasure of the debts!) than to have both these accounts back and my credit rating where it was before this started.

But I feel that the banks smell blood and can see that they can obtain everything they want if they find a compliant judge. For that reason (I think), they are not interested in any form of compromise.

At the end of the day, this is the real problem.

LA

I don't know how long your 'fight' with egg etc has been going on but if they were that sure of their case why have they not yet taken you to court?

When you read the problems that beset others --as they describe it on various forums --it's hard to work out why some get summonses very quickly after defaulting,why others get chased only through in house DCA's and why others have their accounts sold to DCA's after what would seem to be a minimum of effort from the bank to reclaim what they are owed.

These debts are sold onto slimeballs at very low percentile rates but from reading on the forums they seem to have a high success rate in collecting payment from them so if this is the case,why don't the banks themselves pursue these accounts more vigorously and recoup far more than the 5-10% they receive from the DCA's?

It can't be the fear of bad press can it as their image just couldn't be any lower in the eye of the public?

[Guest]

Re: Default Notices: time to remedy

Peter,

The opening paragraph of LJ Kennedy's judgment is:



So the result of the appeal was that a judgment for £13.5K plus costs was overturned and replaced by a judgment for £634 + interest.

HTH

Dad

Yes thanks for that it would seem tht the appication for loss was repealed.

Makes sense.

Peter

[middenmess]

Re: Default Notices: time to remedy

Mmmm.
Thread on CAG now closed by site team...

Invalid Default Notices

This thread seems to be going round in circles, and at 272 pages does not really help anyone to understand the issues. This thread is now closed to new posts.

???