WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

[Amethyst]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

lol, unfortunately the supplier are just accusing the debtor of forging the receipt (regardless of the fact it shows clearly on her bank statement), so very much doubt a WS from the supplier would be forthcoming. (prob best not fill up this thread with another case that I don't even know if the debtor is coming back to the site after her set aside hearing) but I just wondered how it might work following Durkin.

[Nibbler]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

Credit today: http://www.credittoday.co.uk/article...edit-agreement

Ummmmm..... :whistle:

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

@Mo786 So just by way of example then, this case;

This is the credit agreement cancellation.




The credit agreement was cancelled the day after the purchase by the store (the store telephoned the creditor in front of the customer), the goods were kept and payment was made by alternative method (and she has a receipt for the payment).

The creditors though obtained a default judgment on the debtor (((which she has just had a hearing to set aside (don't know how it went as yet).)))

So her credit file will presumably have markers on and in my book, she should be entitled to compensation as the creditor didn't make reasonable enquiries if the debt actually existed.

OR can they still argue the debtor should have contacted the creditor directly rather than the supplier and relying on the supplier to cancel ?

I would have thought that a witness statement by the person who made the call would fill the bill.

[Amethyst]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

So because the sale agreement survived and just the credit agreement was cancelled, the credit agreement should have been cancelled directly with the creditor and the supplier cancelling the agreement has no effect and despite not having had any benefit of the credit the debtor still owes it ?

If she had returned the goods/cancelled the order at the same time as cancelling the credit agreement she would be fine (under Durkin)

Seems a little bananas to me.

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2...lation/13/made

Withdrawal from consumer credit agreement

66A. (1) The debtor under a regulated consumer credit agreement, other than an excluded agreement, may withdraw from the agreement, without giving any reason, in accordance with this section.(2) To withdraw from an agreement under this section the debtor must give oral or written notice of the withdrawal to the creditor before the end of the period of 14 days beginning with the relevant day.

[Amethyst]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

@Mo786 So just by way of example then, this case;

This is the credit agreement cancellation.




The credit agreement was cancelled the day after the purchase by the store (the store telephoned the creditor in front of the customer), the goods were kept and payment was made by alternative method (and she has a receipt for the payment).

The creditors though obtained a default judgment on the debtor (((which she has just had a hearing to set aside (don't know how it went as yet).)))

So her credit file will presumably have markers on and in my book, she should be entitled to compensation as the creditor didn't make reasonable enquiries if the debt actually existed.

OR can they still argue the debtor should have contacted the creditor directly rather than the supplier and relying on the supplier to cancel ?

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

I understood that they could not look into the award of damages for his Actual Loss but they have infact upheld the £8000 award given for damage to his general credit worthiness which should make a claim for this general award much easier?

I am guessing most banks would not dare contest a claim where there is clear grounds for damage to a persons gerneral creditworthiness after this or will just pay people out to stop it going to trial?

I think the fact that it was untested in court and especially an English court would make it if very title worth. But I suppose we will see.

[supasta1]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

I understood that they could not look into the award of damages for his Actual Loss but they have infact upheld the £8000 award given for damage to his general credit worthiness which should make a claim for this general award much easier?

I am guessing most banks would not dare contest a claim where there is clear grounds for damage to a persons gerneral creditworthiness after this or will just pay people out to stop it going to trial?

[mo786]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

How about in a case where the goods are not rejected but the credit agreement is cancelled and payment by an alternative method is made?

Short answer is no.

You can buy goods and cancel credit within 14 days - if you could cancel credit and cancel the goods then you would have 14 days to cancel all goods.

Above applies to sales from retail premises. Onliine and doorstep sales, from Jun 14, will have 14 days cancellation for the item and the credit.

[jon1965]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

Well all I can say is I wish they would make their bloody mind up as to what is a default on a credit file. The fact they have changed their guidance must only mean that as of now that is how it works and is not retrospective. I believe that previous guidance included things such as a DMP and had no reliance on issuing of a default notice.
the whole issue seems to be riddled with conflicting info. I also have to say that even if some of my defaults have been entered incorrectly I really do not want them removing and then adding correctly as that would just screw up my credit file for a further full 6 years and potentially extend the limitations period

[Amethyst]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

Soz, was having vague thoughts about a fund by which Rico might recoup some of his spectacular costs - so those of us that might succeed thanks to his efforts might be able to show their gratitude in a tangible way, if you see what I mean.

Indeed and a lovely idea. When you win, or others do, just let us know you'd like your donation passing on to Rico and we can sort it out at that point.

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

Also the award was uncontested , so the issue was not tested even in the Sottish court.

HFC did not contest the award of £8,000 for damage to credit if breach of duty were established.
However, the Supreme Court rejects Mr Durkin’s attempt to restore the sheriff’s award of damages for
the extra interest he paid and for the loss of the capital gain on the Spanish property. Appeals like the
present may only be made on matters of law, meaning the Supreme Court cannot go behind the First
Division’s findings of fact on these alleged heads of loss

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

It is a Scottish claim that has been upheld in the Supreme court which now carries full weight in all English courts surely??

The Supreme Court has upheld the £8000 reward for simple injury to credit worthiness

This is the point I am unsure of, the way I read it the court had no power to alter the Scottish award one way or the other, so can they really be said to have"upheld" anything.

[Lord_Alcohol]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

Sorry LA not sure how you mean, we'd be happy to pass on specific donations to Rico if that is what you mean ?

Soz, was having vague thoughts about a fund by which Rico might recoup some of his spectacular costs - so those of us that might succeed thanks to his efforts might be able to show their gratitude in a tangible way, if you see what I mean.

[supasta1]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

There has of course been Smeaton vs Equafax and Haliday which directly opposed general damage awards, and distinguished Khopraror as being not relevant.

I think that this case would have to introduce a new element, perhaps it does, I am just unsure of whether it would be considered persuasive with it being a Scottish uncontested claim.

It is a Scottish claim that has been upheld in the Supreme court which now carries full weight in all English courts surely??

The Supreme Court has upheld the £8000 reward for simple injury to credit worthiness