Being very wary of CCA UE advice

[jumper999]

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

I didn't mention moral obligation. I was merely pointing out that the OP had chosen to pay it, so the comment about the clock ticking was un-necessary as he has chosen to pay the debt and is aware that the payments will re-affirm it.

But for what it's worth I don't agree that we should encourage people to avoid debts either.

Also for what it's worth we should encourage the lenders to accept payments when people are in debts, that way saving a lot time pulling out your nails thinking of what to do next.

:tung:

[Angry Cat]

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

I didn't mention moral obligation. I was merely pointing out that the OP had chosen to pay it, so the comment about the clock ticking was un-necessary as he has chosen to pay the debt and is aware that the payments will re-affirm it.

But for what it's worth I don't agree that we should encourage people to avoid debts either.

Lets get this straight, WenbyB.

Factually, I do not advocate nor, encourage people to avoid paying their debts.

However, I also do not find it acceptable when some members appear to encourage the making of payments to agreements that have been or, could be deemed irredeemably unenforceable!

Many banks lent irresponsibly;
many banks ripped off consumers with useless PPI;
if same could not be bothered to draw up agreements correctly, as per s60 & s61, that is down to them.

Let us also not lose sight of the Unfair Relationships Test as per the CCA 2006

The Law is not based upon morals but upon technicalities.

Thus, my view remains the same.

At the end of the day, though it is up to each and every member to decide and every case is different.

[Amethyst]

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

In one of our PCA market study responses to consultations we bought up the issue of allowing overdrafts (speciifically as that was the area the consultation looked at) to have a line drawn under and repayments negotiated at a sensible amount over a certain reasonable period BY CHOICE, BEFORE people got into too much trouble, charges accelerated and defaults and ccjs came into play.

This was because we saw a lot of people with overdrafts, realised things were getting tough and watching charges pile on, having a massive knock on effect, and the bank refused to do anything ''until the account goes to collections''. Allowing people to say ok stop, I'm getting in poop, I'll pay this off at £100 a month over six months, I'll pay the OD interest rate as normal, but stop with the charges (eg. reduce the OD by £100 a month until they are back to a zero balance). If something goes wrong with that then fine default me and throw DCAs at me till I bleed, but at least give me a chance to sort it before writing me off.

It hits problems legally/organisationally because the banks then want to turn it into a loan and the definition with ODs is different under CCA etc to Loans.

[Amethyst]

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

Oh, and I think the Lending Code should be enforced much harder, and some more of the FH parts moved to REGULATORY in BCOBS etc.

[WendyB]

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

Lets get this straight, WenbyB.

Factually, I do not advocate nor, encourage people to avoid paying their debts.

However, I also do not find it acceptable when some members appear to encourage the making of payments to agreements that have been or, could be deemed irredeemably unenforceable!

and that's the point, isn't it? "Could be". Which they wouldn't know until they'd been to Court and could potentially find themselves in a worse situation than they already are.

The Law is not based upon morals but upon technicalities.

yes I know this, unfortunately in the present climate, with Judgements being handed down which are widely regarded as wrong by many people, there is no guarantee that those technicalities will be interpreted in a favourable way. Most of them are not in this situation by choice and do not have a bottomless pit of money at their disposal and cannot afford to risk going to Court in order to prove a point or see which side of bed the Judge got out of that morning. Morals and principles don't pay the bills, this is (as Ed. has put so eloquently in another post somewhere) peoples lives we are discussing, real life where things that happen, happen and you can't rewind it or have an alternate ending if the one that happens is a disaster.


Thus, my view remains the same.
At the end of the day, though it is up to each and every member to decide and every case is different.

I agree completely that it's up to each member to decide but I don't agree that they should be steered along a track that is blatantly fraught with risk at the moment.

I've never been in this situation personally, not sure if you have either AC, so we're on the outside looking in, so to speak. but the below, from someone who has, and very recently too, sums it up perfectly, in my opinion.

I had a letter from MBNA nearly 2 years ago to say

"Due to archive retrieval issues your agreement is not available."

You will see from my thread that i went all the way to court with this and lost. so i still have the debt and a further £6800 in costs

So you are probably doing the right thing if you can get the interest frozen and make a payment plan at an affordable payment

weigh up the pro's and cons

1)Have a balance of £5800 at 32.6% and struggle to find the money and have all that worry, and endless phone calls. rob peter to pay paul etc

2)Accept it , negotiate and pay off a balance of £5800 at 0% £20 per month till your circumstances change for the better

3)or go to court have months of sleepless nights and 100's of hours reading the forums and have a balance of £12600 at 0% and possibly a charging order . so the worry of missing a payment and possibly loosing yourhome is greater

which would you choose?????

Thanks DJ, very succint.

[Angry Cat]

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

and that's the point, isn't it? "Could be". Which they wouldn't know until they'd been to Court and could potentially find themselves in a worse situation than they already are.

Of course, they'd know:
Counsels Opinion!


I agree completely that it's up to each member to decide but I don't agree that they should be steered along a track that is blatantly fraught with risk at the moment.

Counsel would advise and I am not attempting to steer anyone, anywhere:
Always seek specialist legal advice, that is what I advocate.

I've never been in this situation personally, not sure if you have either AC, so we're on the outside looking in, so to speak. but the below, from someone who has, and very recently too, sums it up perfectly, in my opinion.

Yes, I have.

Comments in blue

[WendyB]

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

What I meant was they couldn't be sure of the outcome, until it went to Court, Counsels opinion, is not fact, it's an opinion of how they think it will go, or should go, which as I've said before, is risky at the moment as there are lots of decisions coming down which are completely wrong, apparently. And what if they can't afford Counsel's opinion? Which I would have thought most of the posters on here can't otherwise they'd seek it in the first place and not be on a self help site.

Sorry to hear you've been down this road AC, hope it turned out okay for you. Did you go to Court and win? Was it recently, since the spate of "dodgy" (for want of a better word) decisions. With the benefit of hindsight,would you do the same again, or take a different course of action?

Although I do like a gamble, as lots of people know, my mantra with the gambling is "only stake what you an afford to lose". Stakes are too high in a lot of CCA cases to take the risk of losing. So maybe I'm a play it safe sort of person at heart, I don't know.

[NS7589]

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

I would love to get counsel for my current court case - (see http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...151#post183151 )

And pt2537's suggestion to get a barrister is sound. However, I'm in a DMP and cannot afford the several £1000s a day a barrister will cost. Have I missed a trick here? Is there some way, other than Legal Aid (I don't qualify) to get represented? No Win No Fee?

[Angry Cat]

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

I would love to get counsel for my current court case - (see http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...151#post183151 )

And pt2537's suggestion to get a barrister is sound. However, I'm in a DMP and cannot afford the several £1000s a day a barrister will cost. Have I missed a trick here? Is there some way, other than Legal Aid (I don't qualify) to get represented? No Win No Fee?

Advice from a Public Access Barrister would not costs £1000s. However, one does need to have the ability to do the work that a solicitor would do prior.

It is extremely difficult to obtain legal aid nowadays.

You could investigate the possibility of using a legal firm who offers no win no fee or. perhaps fixed price. But, please do not approach a CMC.

At the end of the day, all depends on your own individual case and your percentage chance of winning?

[NS7589]

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

What's a Public Access Barrister?

[Angry Cat]

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

What's a Public Access Barrister?

http://www.findabarrister.co.uk/more...?current_id=53

[Amethyst]

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

Members of the Public, and commercial and non-commercial organisations are now able to instruct barristers directly on most civil matters. The Public Access page provides information on instructing members of the Bar directly. You can search the Public Access Directory to find a barrister to instruct directly.

.....................

[Crispybacon]

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

Hi All

Apologies for not posting on my own thread for a while, things have been very busy at work meaning 12-16 hour shifts the last couple of weeks so not been able to post much

However, means extra money which is good :tinysmile_grin_t:

Thanks for all the informative responses, as per the norm on the Beagles website I have learned more than any others put together.

For example Councils Opinion - never heard of it didn't know such a thing existed.

Public Barristers - Didn't know that either (thanks for the links Amethyst).

But theres the rub, which is as a layman, and someone who if things were to get to court, could not afford legal representation, I would have to go as LiP.

I wouldn't want to then add to the banks successes against LiP's and make others lives consequently more difficult with yet another case for creditors to quote in their favour (if I were to lose of course!!! There is always the chance that I would win but I have no false belief in my knowledge and understand that)

There is also the element of risk. AC is absolutely right in that any payment resets the clock, and I must say thank you for the reminder.

But 5 and a bit years is a loooooong time to wait for Statute Barred to kick in and for me the probability is that MBNA would produce an enforceable agreement before then (especially as it would seem that a 'reconstituted' copy is now acceptable in the courts).

As was said, my choice, and for the moment using UE has worked in my favour as it has provided leverage over MBNA to accept the DMP and freeze charges and interest.

In the context of our overall debt, the balance with MBNA is a small % but they have given us one of the largest % of harrassment and grief (with the exception of AMEX!). This was the only reason why I looked at UE in the first place, and again it has worked for us in this respect as we now do not get the threats of legal action etc.

But I am interested in everyones views and experiences, especially those that have followed through the UE route and have got to court, or have got to 6 years and the debt is now statute barred.

All the best

Crispy

[middenmess]

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

I would love to get counsel for my current court case - (see http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...151#post183151 )

And pt2537's suggestion to get a barrister is sound. However, I'm in a DMP and cannot afford the several £1000s a day a barrister will cost. Have I missed a trick here? Is there some way, other than Legal Aid (I don't qualify) to get represented? No Win No Fee?

You could always contact pt's firm.
If they take it on you know you have a good chance of succeeding-if they don't want to represent you [other than being too busy] then you will then know exactly what your options are.

[Angry Cat]

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

You could always contact pt's firm.
If they take it on you know you have a good chance of succeeding-if they don't want to represent you [other than being too busy] then you will then know exactly what your options are.

Good advice, middenmiss!