• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Phoenix Recoveries v Kotecha Jan 2011

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Re: Phoenix Recoveries v Kotecha Jan 2011

    Originally posted by Nibbler View Post
    yup i emailed Joe at BAILII this morning

    were sending him some more judgments to put up too, to hopefully provide more assistance
    I work for Roach Pittis Solicitors. I give my free time available to helping other on the forum and would be happy to try and assist informally where needed. Any posts I make on LegalBeagles are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as legal advice. Any advice I provide is without liability.

    If you need to contact me please email me on Pt@roachpittis.co.uk .

    I have been involved in leading consumer credit and data protection cases including Harrison v Link Financial Limited (High Court), Grace v Blackhorse (Court of Appeal) and also Kotecha v Phoenix Recoveries (Court of Appeal) along with a number of other reported cases and often blog about all things consumer law orientated.

    You can also follow my blog on consumer credit here.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Phoenix Recoveries v Kotecha Jan 2011

      Originally posted by pt2537 View Post
      yup i emailed Joe at BAILII this morning

      were sending him some more judgments to put up too, to hopefully provide more assistance
      Good. I saw your comment about some more cases coming, and hoped they would go up as well.

      Thanks.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Phoenix Recoveries v Kotecha Jan 2011

        Originally posted by pt2537 View Post
        yup i emailed Joe at BAILII this morning

        were sending him some more judgments to put up too, to hopefully provide more assistance
        Thanks Paul :heh:

        Comment


        • #94
          I know this is an old thread but I am researching s127 (pre 2007) and wondered about this Kotecha case.
          sl27(3) provides, in relation to agreements made before 6 April 2007, as follows:

          "The Court shall not make an enforcement order under s 65(1) if section 61(1) (a) (signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under s60(l)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor ..(whether or not in the prescribed manner)."

          I know the case was decided upon the interest rate discrepancy but Kotecha was a 1998 agreement. so IF the creditor had not been able to find a scan of a SIGNED application (allbeit with reconstituted terms) then the agreement would have been unenforceable anyway under s127, correct?

          I have been given a so called reconstituted agreement for an agreement supposedly for a card taken out in Nov 1996 but does not have my signature. Is this therefore unenforceable just because it is before 2007 and does not bear my signature? I believe the reconstituted copy does have all the other criteria though.

          Finally, is there a way of telling roughly when an agreement was complied....ie are there any give away signs.?

          Comment


          • #95
            I know this is an old thread but I am researching s127 (pre 2007) and wondered about this Kotecha case.
            sl27(3) provides, in relation to agreements made before 6 April 2007, as follows:
            "The Court shall not make an enforcement order under s 65(1) if section 61(1) (a) (signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under s60(l)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor ..(whether or not in the prescribed manner)."
            I know the case was decided upon the interest rate discrepancy but Kotecha was a 1998 agreement. so IF the creditor had not been able to find a scan of a SIGNED application (allbeit with reconstituted terms) then the agreement would have been unenforceable anyway under s127, correct?
            I have been given a so called reconstituted agreement for an agreement supposedly for a card taken out in Nov 1996 but does not have my signature. Is this therefore unenforceable just because it is before 2007 and does not bear my signature? I believe the reconstituted copy does have all the other criteria though.
            Finally, is there a way of telling roughly when an agreement was complied....ie are there any give away signs.?

            ALSO. If the court finds in favour of the defendant and the agreement does not comply with the CCA 1974 , can the defendant counterclaim for all monies already paid to the claimant.

            Comment


            • #96
              very old thread start a new one for response please

              Comment

              View our Terms and Conditions

              LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

              If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


              If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
              Working...
              X