Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

[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!

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

[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

[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

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

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

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

[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,

[Amethyst]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

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

[volvodriver]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

NOt really selective the second half of the sentanse is also important where he particularily mentions the practice in a credit agrement.
Tell me which aspect of the bad notices issue do consider live and kicking

Peter

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 i do English is a wonderful language.

Leaving myself wide open here aint i.

Peter

Yes because you are the master of obfuscation.

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

Vdr

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

Does that mean you agree with me?

Yes i do English is a wonderful language.

Leaving myself wide open here aint i.

Peter

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

Bit of selectiuve quoting here me thinks.

It actually says:


"

• . However, bad notices can often be remedied by the service of good notices and I see no reason why that should not be so in respect of credit agreements."

In the English I learned and studied the word often does not mean always. We should be asking when does "often" apply in respect of default notices, and what are the criteria for deciding whether in any particicular set of circumstances it can be remedied.

I consider the issue of bad notices still very much alive and kicking.

Vdr

NOt really selective the second half of the sentanse is also important where he particularily mentions the practice in a credit agrement.
Tell me which aspect of the bad notices issue do consider live and kicking

Peter

[pt2537]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

I do not think that it needs to be any clearer really,

Enforcement cannot occur on the back of a bad notice.

The bad notice can be remedied.

The court has the power to stay proceedings as we all know anyway.

So i dont see where the issue is

[Amethyst]

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

lol sorry, and yes I know, I wasn't meaning it sarcasticly either. Actually I think there are three similar cases on here with Nationwide over the last year.

Re: Contracts, Termination, Repudiation and Rescission

I agree up to there

that seems to be the sticking point for people ...the agreement ISN'T TERMINATED because it can't be due to the defective DN and is in court in error .... yes it should be kicked out and they should have to restart after the new DN isnt remedied but that doesn't sit right with the overriding objective.


Peter, I know it isn't unusual I just though B&W docs might help M1 out with the question.

God what is it about me that everyone thnks i am having a go i am not, i am glad you posted this it is very helpful .Bet you think i am being sarcastic now, i am not, bloody hell


Peter