Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

[pt2537]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

Peter, it was selective and you know it - its written in black and white. Dont be obtuse.

He says he sees there is no reason why bad notices in credit agreements can also OFTEN be remedied.

Often, not always.

The aspect of bad niotices being alive and kicking is the argument that goes on, which this judgement DOES NOT resolve.

Vdr
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------


Yes because you are the master of obfuscation.

Do you need me to get a definition of that word?

Vdr

If this judgment doesnt put the matter to bed, then i dont know what will frankly,

[volvodriver]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

Under what circumstances VD do you perceive reissue of a DN would be barred ?

I've really got no idea, but I cannot understand why a supposedly astute financial organisation shopuld be able to issue DN's until they get it right, and even after court proceedings have been issued, the right of issue of same which only arises after the issue of a DN which is in every respect correct.

I cannot accept that that is any sort of justice, its legal harrasment of the first order which cannot be right.

Vdr

[Guest]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

Peter, it was selective and you know it - its written in black and white. Dont be obtuse.

He says he sees there is no reason why bad notices in credit agreements can also OFTEN be remedied.

Often, not always.

The aspect of bad niotices being alive and kicking is the argument that goes on, which this judgement DOES NOT resolve.

Vdr
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------


Yes because you are the master of obfuscation.

Do you need me to get a definition of that word?

Vdr

Yes please

THer are a number of ideas about DNs
DO you think that the DN cannot be represented if defective
or do you thinkyou can accept atermination and thus repudiate the contract or any combination of the two

Peter

[volvodriver]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

If this judgment doesnt put the matter to bed, then i dont know what will frankly,

Paul, what is your take on the word OFTEN in the sentence quoted?

Does it have a different impact in law to that in common English useage?

I'm not trying to be clever, I'm seeking to understand.

Vdr
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

Yes please

THer are a number of ideas about DNs
DO you think that the DN cannot be represented if defective
or do you thinkyou can accept atermination and thus repudiate the contract or any combination of the two

Peter

Obfuscation is the concealment of intended meaning in communication, making communication confusing, intentionally ambiguous, and more difficult to interpret.

in reply to your question, see my reply to Amethyst

Vdr

[pt2537]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

Paul, what is your take on the word OFTEN in the sentence quoted?

Does it have a different impact in law to that in common English useage?

I'm not trying to be clever, I'm seeking to understand.

Vdr

It seems to me that the judge was saying that bad notices can often be remedied, as we can see from case law, such as Manni Investments vs Eagle star direct

And that those principles there can equally apply here where a notice is found to be bad, a good notice can be issued to remedy this

We must remember the underlying reason for a default notice is to tell you what you have done wrong and what you must do to put it right
It is not to allow you to borrow money and not pay it back.

Thats the trouble, now the court said no enforcement on the back of a bad notice so if the court finds at trial the notice is bad then that is that they cannot enforce

[volvodriver]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

It seems to me that the judge was saying that bad notices can often be remedied, as we can see from case law, such as Manni Investments vs Eagle star direct

And that those principles there can equally apply here where a notice is found to be bad, a good notice can be issued to remedy this

We must remember the underlying reason for a default notice is to tell you what you have done wrong and what you must do to put it right
It is not to allow you to borrow money and not pay it back.

Thats the trouble, now the court said no enforcement on the back of a bad notice so if the court finds at trial the notice is bad then that is that they cannot enforce

And the 64000$ question.

Until when? never? or until they've managed to get a DN right?

That seems to be a big issue for lots of OCs, DCAs and soliciors.

Vfr

[Guest]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

If this judgment doesnt put the matter to bed, then i dont know what will frankly,

I think most people accept this is a none starter,in fact i think that most people always did .
It is just that the few who believe are very vocal and maybe a little intimidating to some.
I just feel sorry for the people who have been missled by this, there are plenty about unfortunately.

Peter

[jumper999]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

This is copied from another site which I believe sums it up quite nicely


Put simply there was a bad default notice, they defaulted and assigned the account prior to the rememdy period, the remedy period was only 12 days (not 14), there were no terms sent and the Judge agreed with the claimant (ie the debtor).

The judge threw out the claimants counterclaim and instead quashed the original debt of £20k - the claimant (ie the consumer) won!

This is another fine example of case law to follow against MBNA and their slap-happy attitude of taking action, and also highlights that judges DO agree that not all banks are perfect!

[volvodriver]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

This is copied from another site which I believe sums it up quite nicely


Put simply there was a bad default notice, they defaulted and assigned the account prior to the rememdy period, the remedy period was only 12 days (not 14), there were no terms sent and the Judge agreed with the claimant (ie the debtor).

The judge threw out the claimants counterclaim and instead quashed the original debt of £20k - the claimant (ie the consumer) won!

This is another fine example of case law to follow against MBNA and their slap-happy attitude of taking action, and also highlights that judges DO agree that not all banks are perfect!

Yes but.

The DCA was the defendant not the claimant.

Vdr
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

It seems to me that the judge was saying that bad notices can often be remedied, as we can see from case law, such as Manni Investments vs Eagle star direct

And that those principles there can equally apply here where a notice is found to be bad, a good notice can be issued to remedy this

We must remember the underlying reason for a default notice is to tell you what you have done wrong and what you must do to put it right
It is not to allow you to borrow money and not pay it back.

Thats the trouble, now the court said no enforcement on the back of a bad notice so if the court finds at trial the notice is bad then that is that they cannot enforce

Sorry again Paul.

What or who decides if they can be remedied, if often applies, that implies there is some criteria when it can and cant.

You quoted a case where it can. Is there one where it cant?

Vdr

[jumper999]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

Yes but.

The DCA was the defendant not the claimant.

Vdr

Which I think is bloody awesome and nice to see the shoe on the other foot for once :tinysmile_kiss_t4:

[never-in-doubt]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

Cheers guys. Brilliant entertainment value & great to see so many differing views.

Paul, well done to you & Watsons for the brilliant result (Harrison v Link). Awesome news.

[volvodriver]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

Which I think is bloody awesome and nice to see the shoe on the other foot for once :tinysmile_kiss_t4:

At last something I can agree whole heartedly with!:beagle:

[New_Age_Biker]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

I think it was M1 who asked if being at trial on the back of a faulty Dn/ termination represented abuse of process
i.e.
A Dn should have a date, being a date, when the debtor should rectify by
I have Dn's that state 17 days from the date of this notice

Clearly the Dn is faulty, when we get to court it will be on the back of a faulty DN
Is that abuse of process? The fact has already been pointed out to the OC

[never-in-doubt]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

This is copied from another site which I believe sums it up quite nicely


Put simply there was a bad default notice, they defaulted and assigned the account prior to the rememdy period, the remedy period was only 12 days (not 14), there were no terms sent and the Judge agreed with the claimant (ie the debtor).

The judge threw out the claimants counterclaim and instead quashed the original debt of £20k - the claimant (ie the consumer) won!

This is another fine example of case law to follow against MBNA and their slap-happy attitude of taking action, and also highlights that judges DO agree that not all banks are perfect!

I wrote this on my site!!

[Guest]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

Paul, what is your take on the word OFTEN in the sentence quoted?

Does it have a different impact in law to that in common English useage?

I'm not trying to be clever, I'm seeking to understand.

Vdr
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------


Obfuscation is the concealment of intended meaning in communication, making communication confusing, intentionally ambiguous, and more difficult to interpret.

in reply to your question, see my reply to Amethyst

Vdr

I see you do not think a fault dn can be re presented .What do yhou say to the re represented documents on here. Are they to in some way missqquoted?

Peter