Recon CCA Acceptable in Court

[The Debt Star]

Re: Recon CCA Acceptable in Court

who is brave enough/foolish enough to be that test case

i lost my case when the creditor said they "lost" the original. i acknowledged i had signed an application form but not an agreement. They produced a recon and the court accepted it.

the judge said they did not need the original to enforce as why have a system to produce recons...

£6.5k debt became £12.8k with costs.

could have gone for appeal but this would have made it up to £20k if i had lsot.

im brave but not that brave

I feel for you, man. Gutted. You are describing EXACTLY the sort of travesties that creditors are getting away with - and largely because (imo) they have the resources to fund legal campaigns on appeal and can absorb any negative costs.

[Amethyst]

Re: Recon CCA Acceptable in Court

I don't really see what they are getting away with. From the off, DJ admitted owing the debt and signing the application form (which in most cases is also the agreement) There was a copy of the application form, it had all the prescribed terms on it. I don't see any travesty other than CJ was encouraged to fight it in court on spurious grounds and ended up doubling the debt with costs, when he could have got an installment order straight off for an affordable amount set by the court with a shed load less stress and expense. There wasnt a big dispute about the amount owing, it was simply an argument whether the application form was a valid agreement and whether the recon was the right period.

The travesty is in misinformation and people pushing others into court for some weird self satisfaction.

Actual unfairness and true detriment I would fight all the way.

And yes, it does make me cross. Maybe I need another break eh.

[The Debt Star]

Re: Recon CCA Acceptable in Court

I keep forgetting about the application forms, yeah. True. Having said that, most of the SARs I send do not come back with copies of the apps either.

Thinking it about it (in edit mode!), if the application was so crucial, then why in DJ's case did the creditor deem it necessary to cobble up a recon in the first place? I'm a newbie to CCA stuff and don't particularly like it as its way too technical but - and here's my point - if the application "is" the agreement then why the fook do we need recon CCAs? Either the cvredit agreement/contract is critical or it isn't, surely?

Be that as it may, the OP OTR has said that he went to court on the merits of advice he had received OTR ref recons. Well, I won''t be making that mistake on the advice on this thread (however much I wish it were otherwise!!!)

No, don't disappear again!!! You're needed too much!!

DS

[Differentjudge]

Re: Recon CCA Acceptable in Court

The travesty is in misinformation and people pushing others into court for some weird self satisfaction.


Read more at: Recon CCA Acceptable in Court - Legal Beagles Consumer Forum


Very true

i wish i had stood back from it all and not got steam rollered into it by many who had their axe to grind.....

live and learn

[The Debt Star]

Re: Recon CCA Acceptable in Court

The travesty is in misinformation and people pushing others into court for some weird self satisfaction.

Very true

i wish i had stood back from it all and not got steam rollered into it by many who had their axe to grind.....

live and learn

Well I've been shot down in burning flames OTR for suggesting the OP might want to be wary of adverse costs and that he's going against the flow nowadays...but he seems determined ro press on and is being encouraged to do so.

Not that I blame him at all, I personally think its outrageous that creditors get away with contravening the CCA this way. But I, for one, wouldn't risk my money fighting it. As you say, live 'n' learn.

[basa48]

Re: Recon CCA Acceptable in Court

I keep forgetting about the application forms, yeah. True. Having said that, most of the SARs I send do not come back with copies of the apps either.

Thinking it about it (in edit mode!), if the application was so crucial, then why in DJ's case did the creditor deem it necessary to cobble up a recon in the first place? I'm a newbie to CCA stuff and don't particularly like it as its way too technical but - and here's my point - if the application "is" the agreement then why the fook do we need recon CCAs? Either the cvredit agreement/contract is critical or it isn't, surely?

Be that as it may, the OP OTR has said that he went to court on the merits of advice he had received OTR ref recons. Well, I won''t be making that mistake on the advice on this thread (however much I wish it were otherwise!!!)

No, don't disappear again!!! You're needed too much!!

DS

Fact is applications are only executed agreements IF they contained the prescribed terms and are subsequently signed by the lender.

Unfortunately (for them) many lenders only kept the front (signature) page and forgot the PTs attached or on the back.

In order to prove an enforceable agreement they have to 'produce' a set of prescribed terms identical to those at inception. They should also show how they were 'contained' with the signature page.

The debtor has to insist that they did not see or sign any document that had PTs attached or on the reverse and show that the application refers to PTs in another document.

The 'assumed facts' in Waksman was the debtor signed an application and sent it to the lender who then produced an agreement which was again signed by the debtor. That was what Waksman declared a properly executed agreement, not the application form.

One should also not forget Waksman saying that agreements in their original form are required in agreements that have been varied.

[The Debt Star]

Re: Recon CCA Acceptable in Court

Basa, that's a very useful post.

I have also just read cumbreath's post #151 OTR in which she states:

"Hi for what it is worth, I have just lost in court on a 'balance of probabilities' with a reply form with my signature, nothing from OC and separate unlinked t&cs. I argued all that variations of t&cs should be supplied and s127(3). [There were also other matters such DN etc that were pleaded.
I have been advised that reconstructions of this type are regularly accepted by courts and that the courts are in a rather pro bank cycle at present."


So unless Scrible gets decent help and advice from those encouraging him to appeal - and can afford to lose £6500 or thereabouts if the appeal goes wrong - he should think again.

Its sad there's such a blatant disregard in the courts for the letter and spirit of the Act.