Being very wary of CCA UE advice

**pompeyfaith** · 5th October 2010, 20:28:PM

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

You are right in recent judgements that creditors are overcoming the barriers and most cca issues are now dead in the water.

I wish I realised this before going head first into court action with mbna.

To succeed on cca issues would need a cast iron case the usual enforceability issues and DN issues no longer work.

In my mind it is far better to mitigate a settlement than to litigate in a court room.

You would also save yourself a packet in costs which would be upwards of 6k
PF

**pompeyfaith** · 5th October 2010, 20:38:PM

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

Furthermore I believe you would get a better outcome with a judge if they did start proceedings if you where straight and said look yes I do owe the debt but I am struggling for what ever reason and can we come to an agreement that is both fair to myself and the creditor.

I believe any judge would then request I&E sheets to set an amount that is affordable to you.

PF

**Amethyst** · 5th October 2010, 20:39:PM

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

Yeyyyyyy :hug::llama::hippie::fish2:

~~~ Consumer Credit Agreements - A Guide ~~~~ inc. Letters - Legal Beagles Consumer Forum is our guide to use of the CCA

We basically have always used it to get debts returned to your original creditor, and get unfair charges and excessive interest ditched, and if needed use deficiencies as a negotiating tool to get repayment plans at affordable rates, frozen interest and charges etc set up so the debt can be repaid at a sensible rate without incurring credit record trashings, stress, costs, charging orders and so on.

I personally don't like the 'unenforceable, stop paying and let them sue you!' tactic that seems to be favoured in far too many places. We KNOW it doesnt work. It used to, sometimes, but mainly it just results in a CCJ against you.

If you are on a payment plan, or are keeping up payments, stick with it. Negotiate a better deal for yourself if you can and make sure they treat you fairly.

If they attack you, and there are ACTUAL deficiencies then defend and fight them. But don't imagine them because it's easier than admitting you're in shedloads of debt.

Anyway that doesnt help you

With that letter you should be able to get a very affordable repayment arrangement until you can do a full and final, quite safe knowing they are unlikely to take you to court....they can put an Arrangement marker on your credit file rather than a big fat D, and you don't have to deal with the stresses of defending a court claim in the knowledge the cards are stacked against you.

If they do refuse to accept keep making the offered payments and if they do go to court offer to pay on the debt which you do not dispute, installments at an affordable rate, and stave off any further additions to the debt or charge orders etc. If they are still nasty Defend your ass off. But you look much better to the judge

and are much more likely to get your own way.

Thats not very technical and legal as an answer for you is it, but its how I think it should be done.

And I can't spell deficiencies.

**Amethyst** · 5th October 2010, 20:40:PM

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

Same as pompey

lol (sorry crossed posts)

**pompeyfaith** · 5th October 2010, 20:41:PM

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

And to give you some idea on my 6.5k debt to mbna I was ordered to pay £20 a mth with no chance of a CO providing I keep to the order.

PF

**basa48** · 5th October 2010, 20:42:PM

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

Originally posted by pompeyfaith View Post

You are right in recent judgements that creditors are overcoming the barriers and most cca issues are now dead in the water.

I wish I realised this before going head first into court action with mbna.

To succeed on cca issues would need a cast iron case the usual enforceability issues and DN issues no longer work.

In my mind it is far better to mitigate a settlement than to litigate in a court room.

You would also save yourself a packet in costs which would be upwards of 6k
PF

Sorry Pompey, but I have to disagree. There is some truth that badly prepared debtors may get tripped up by the recent Carey ruling. But as for McGuffick (quoted in the MBNA letter) that is total ballcocks!

McGuffick is only useful to a creditor if the debtor is claiming unenforceable due to non compliance with s78. That IS a dead end now and IMO rightly so.

As far as faulty DNs are concerned - again only a fool would try to defeat an agreement with just a day out on a DN. But many are truly faulty by claiming well over what is legally due, or being due well short of the legal 14 days - this truly disadvantages the debtors ability to pay and is a good legal argument (the judges have been arguing de minimus discrepancies do not disadvantage debtors).

There are many truly unenforceable agreements out there, usually based on application forms where the T&Cs were never contained or attached. There are very strong arguments to declare them unenforceable pursuant to s61. Carey can be shown to only be useful to the creditor for s78 requests. As HHJ Waksman quite plainly states 'reconstituted' agreements are for current information, not proof purpose of executed agreements.

At the end of the day, creditors will only go to court when they have a good chance of winning anyway. To lose would be really bad PR.

**Amethyst** · 5th October 2010, 20:47:PM

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

Tools sis has £20 a month on £18k, roygoodbeat has £27.40 a month on £32k (with a charging order), I have £65 a month on £6.5k (with a charging order) ......

Brandon - 17k costs (plus the debt)
Slevin - 6.8k costs (plus the debt)
and so on and so forth...... (I could go find out everyones costs but I can't be assed right now lol)

Some people have had debts 'written off' (though a couple of big shouty WINS are actually just on hold until the creditors find the agreement, and a few more shouty WINS are just 'phew didnt get costs and got a repayment plan - ALWAYS read the whole WIN threads elsewhere ! I think people see the WIN title, then read up to the defence and stick it in without checking the ACTUAL result lol)

Now misstated credit is a different matter - straight forward (well complicated but not technical ACTUAL breaches where creditors add on the deposit rather than remove it and hide PPI and commission in the total credit and so on ) but this isnt that, its a techhy cant find the agreement, we may find it one day or we might knock one up to satisfy Carey ... so use this while you can.

**pompeyfaith** · 5th October 2010, 20:49:PM

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

As far as faulty DNs are concerned - again only a fool would try to defeat an agreement with just a day out on a DN. But many are truly faulty by claiming well over what is legally due, or being due well short of the legal 14 days - this truly disadvantages the debtors ability to pay and is a good legal argument (the judges have been arguing de minimus discrepancies do not disadvantage debtors).

My default notice was not only 4 days out, but they also did not produce it in the bundle instead they produced a forgery I point this out to the judge who was not interested he said did you get a dn and I said yes but it was out due to the dates he said do you have it with you

I was now thinking great but no he took one look at it and said although the dates are out you still had time time to pay so threw it out.

PF

**Amethyst** · 5th October 2010, 20:49:PM

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

And we're probably going to have a row. Sorrrrrryyyyyyyyyyy xx

Show me MBNA cases which have actually WON (ie got the debt written off) in court, or even pre court if you like, since November 2009.

Also some faulty DN cases winning in court would be nice to see............

**Crispybacon** · 5th October 2010, 20:51:PM

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

Hi Both

Thanks for the swift and excellent responses.

The CCA story has been interesting reading. I was wondering when creditors would reach 'critical mass' and the cost of losing money outweighed going to the courts and risking a precedent. It would seem the last couple of months shows they are hurting from this tactic and fighting back.

PF - Reading some of your posts I really hope your case goes your way for you.

Thanks for link Amethyst I'll have a good read when I'm not so tired!

I have recently seen people (on other forums, not here!) being advised to send CCA requests for things like mobile phone debt and overdrafts which suggests to me that this is now being used without any thought so its not surprising creditors are responding 'in force'.

I think I'll have a chat with DW and send off an I/E sheet with a pro rata offer of payment to MBNA to test the water and see how they respond.

Best

Crispy

**pompeyfaith** · 5th October 2010, 20:51:PM

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

I have no costs but that only purely because of the way the creditors sols handled the case but I was still handed a judgement on the debt of 6.5k.

PF

**Amethyst** · 5th October 2010, 20:52:PM

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

Sounds like a plan Crispy. If you need any help just yell.

**Crispybacon** · 5th October 2010, 20:54:PM

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

Hi PF, sorry didn't realise you had already been to court :tinysmile_cry_t:

Still catching up on reading all the posts here......

**pompeyfaith** · 5th October 2010, 20:54:PM

Re: Being very wary of CCA UE advice

PF - Reading some of your posts I really hope your case goes your way for you.

My MBNA case is finished Jan 09

The boot is on the other foot now getting back PPI owed by my bank so I can be shot of MBNA

PF

Being very wary of CCA UE advice

Being very wary of CCA UE advice

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Announcement

Court Claim ?