reconstituted agreement

[roksee]

Re: reconstituted agreement

some good arguements but surely the fact of this matter is that...

The judge can only make a judgement on law, since the original contract t and c are required to be kept, then the judge must must rule that the company has failed to operate within the law......he cannot judge on an illegality, by way of his judgement, he has incorrectly applied the( his version of the )law.

He would be operating in Ultra vires, an argument in law is that the legal definition of an executed agreement and an unexecuted agreement have been discribed in a previous section.

Hence the lawful requirement to produce a copy of the executed agreement dictates by the previous section, IT must have a signature to be executed, without a signature it is merely unexecuted, the law does not require a copy of the unexecuted agreement.

The argument is there.

[Ihaterbs]

Re: reconstituted agreement

some good arguements but surely the fact of this matter is that...

The judge can only make a judgement on law, since the original contract t and c are required to be kept, then the judge must must rule that the company has failed to operate within the law......he cannot judge on an illegality, by way of his judgement, he has incorrectly applied the( his version of the )law.

He would be operating in Ultra vires, an argument in law is that the legal definition of an executed agreement and an unexecuted agreement have been discribed in a previous section.

Hence the lawful requirement to produce a copy of the executed agreement dictates by the previous section, IT must have a signature to be executed, without a signature it is merely unexecuted, the law does not require a copy of the unexecuted agreement.

The argument is there.

The DJ will decide on balance.

Was document containing the prescribed terms signed by the debtor

[frisp]

Re: reconstituted agreement

also

Can evidence be provided that shows beneifit can only be received if a process was followed, ergo, on the balance of probabilities, there must have been a signed agreement for you to have received the benefit.

The CPR allows balance of probability arguments.

IMHO You're not certain of winning if your case solely revolves around the lack of a signature at best the oddds are 50/50.

[fishface]

Re: reconstituted agreement

Most agreements that are at least a couple of years old will almost certainly have been varied.

The creditor must still produce the original agreement in this circumstance, a recon would be useless.

[Ihaterbs]

Re: reconstituted agreement

Most agreements that are at least a couple of years old will almost certainly have been varied.

The creditor must still produce the original agreement in this circumstance, a recon would be useless.

They must produce a true copy of the original

[Sparkie1723]

Re: reconstituted agreement

I have posted this on another thread somewhere..........I have THREE CCA agreements that BOS supplied me with each saying quite clearly that each one was my CCA agreement, (all different terms and conditions) when I pointed this out to them they wrote my debt off without any hestitation..

This will prove to any Court that a Bank can and will reconstruct an agreement to suit any situation............the Carey ruling gives the Banks licence to do this.....which in my view is a licence to commit fraud...........anyone who wants to use these three different agreements are welcome to use them.......I still have them..............they are from about 2004 I think.
I'm sure I can find them again.

Sparkie

[frisp]

Re: reconstituted agreement

I have posted this on another thread somewhere..........I have THREE CCA agreements that BOS supplied me with each saying quite clearly that each one was my CCA agreement, (all different terms and conditions) when I pointed this out to them they wrote my debt off without any hestitation..

This will prove to any Court that a Bank can and will reconstruct an agreement to suit any situation............the Carey ruling gives the Banks licence to do this.....which in my view is a licence to commit fraud...........anyone who wants to use these three different agreements are welcome to use them.......I still have them..............they are from about 2004 I think.
I'm sure I can find them again.

Sparkie

Sparkie - Carey is often misunderstood, the whole thing needs careful reading to understand the extent of this judgement. Yes it allows for reconstitution, however this does not negate the requirement for a signature.

The CPR also allows for a balance of probabilities argument, put a reconstituted argument together supported by witness statements that this was the way business was done in that day add to this card statements where the consumer clearly used the card and obtained benefit and you can see where the balance may lie.

Not saying its right, my advice would be anyone attempting to argue validity of agreements with T&Cs needs to get good legal representation on a no win no fee basis.

[Sparkie1723]

Re: reconstituted agreement

Sparkie - Carey is often misunderstood, the whole thing needs careful reading to understand the extent of this judgement. Yes it allows for reconstitution, however this does not negate the requirement for a signature.

The CPR also allows for a balance of probabilities argument, put a reconstituted argument together supported by witness statements that this was the way business was done in that day add to this card statements where the consumer clearly used the card and obtained benefit and you can see where the balance may lie.

Not saying its right, my advice would be anyone attempting to argue validity of agreements with T&Cs needs to get good legal representation on a no win no fee basis.

I believe I understand it quite well it only allows a reconstructed agreement to comply with a section 78 request..........what I am concerned about is the fact that they can reconstruct one with any terms and conditions they may decide to use......it has been ruled that the signature on the back of the credit card is sufficient to show acceptance of the agreement and terms and conditions that apply.

Sparkie

I am not a lawyer this is only my personal view of matters and agree that all should take proper legal advice on any view put forward by any unqualified person such as myself

[frisp]

Re: reconstituted agreement

I believe I understand it quite well it only allows a reconstructed agreement to comply with a section 78 request..........what I am concerned about is the fact that they can reconstruct one with any terms and conditions they may decide to use......it has been ruled that the signature on the back of the credit card is sufficient to show acceptance of the agreement and terms and conditions that apply.

Sparkie

I am not a lawyer this is only my personal view of matters and agree that all should take proper legal advice on any view put forward by any unqualified person such as myself

The terms still have to relate to the agreement, all they need is a statement from a member of staff that they are kosher and that's it i.e. a reasonable argument. However if as has been done you can provide the real T&Cs and forums are a good place for obtaining these, you will have proven that they lied under oath. Case over, hefty fine and damages to you.

I can't remember the ruling that says the signature on the card is good enough, I often didn't sign mine and it rarely got chkd and whn I did I just signed it there and then.

My point was that Carey has clarified a lot that needed clarification he also did a lot to help as well. SO dismissing Carey just cause of the reconstitution thing is a mistake, IMHO.