CCA Requests - any point?

[mystery1]

Re: CCA Requests - any point?

Just a tongue in cheek question, if you use S78 sucessfully and as per your case, does that mean it nulifies the whole contract and they have to return all your money:beagle:?

No. It means it is unenforceable in court. If the creditor really screws up the unenforceability may be only temporary.

M1

[diddydicky]

Re: CCA Requests - any point?

Legal Beagles Consumer Forum

Page 14 of that case.

M1

a reconstitued agreement showing £12 fees (circa 2006) for an earlier agreement would clearly be different in substance and would show that the alleged reconstruction was not of the origianl

i recently had mbna provide a illegible alleged agreement in response to s78 and in an application for a SJ- and then accompanied it with a "more legible" copy for the assistance of the court- which had a totally different heading and could not have been of the same agreement-in substance - it also had a different form of words so I challenged that this was really a more legible copy of the former document- and suggested that what the claimant had done was simply "grabbed" a similar type of agreement from that year- of which the claimant had many.... and so the judge directly asked the claimants counsel if this was so- and she admitted that her client "may have" made a more legible copy- not of the agreement it purported to be of- but of a "similar" agreement "in order to assist the court"

needless to say the judge was far from impressed and dismissed the application and costs.

[firefly]

Re: CCA Requests - any point?

It does sound as though the reasoning is going in the right direction,but ,tell me this PT ,how can we disprove the reconstructed agreement when we dont hold the original.
Or have I yet again missed the main point here.
Sorry for being a bit slow PT but its best to fully understand this as it happens.
Thanks in advance
ff

[pt2537]

Re: CCA Requests - any point?

It does sound as though the reasoning is going in the right direction,but ,tell me this PT ,how can we disprove the reconstructed agreement when we dont hold the original.
Or have I yet again missed the main point here.
Sorry for being a bit slow PT but its best to fully understand this as it happens.
Thanks in advance
ff

it is an uphill struggle, i have to admit,

and to be honest, i dont know, but there are people out there who do have the documents to help us prove our cases, we just need to find them

I have found one and that is awaiting the formal handing down of another judgment, from the High Court

[mystery1]

Re: CCA Requests - any point?

It does sound as though the reasoning is going in the right direction,but ,tell me this PT ,how can we disprove the reconstructed agreement when we dont hold the original.
Or have I yet again missed the main point here.
Sorry for being a bit slow PT but its best to fully understand this as it happens.
Thanks in advance
ff

One way is if they are stupid enough to have more than one attempt and they differ in a key area.

Another is to SAR them and check the opening statement assuming it 6 years or less obviously.

M1

[basa48]

Re: CCA Requests - any point?

.................you will need to show difference between the two documents to run the s78 arguments. If you cant show the terms produced aren't the original ones and the opponents have evidence that they are, such as a witness statement from an employee of the creditor ( subject to the usual cross examination in court) then it is likely the Court will accept the evidence as being correct in the absence of any counter arguments that have merit.

OK I am sure I am missing the point here.

Why does anyone still consider challenging creditors with the s78 argument? It is all but impossible to disprove a reconstituted agreement since Carey and now this judgement.

What is wrong with the s61(1) / s 127(3) route? That still requires copies of originals especially where varied as per Reg 7 and backed up in Carey. Or am I wrong?

[pt2537]

Re: CCA Requests - any point?

OK I am sure I am missing the point here.

Why does anyone still consider challenging creditors with the s78 argument? It is all but impossible to disprove a reconstituted agreement since Carey and now this judgement.

What is wrong with the s61(1) / s 127(3) route? That still requires copies of originals especially where varied as per Reg 7 and backed up in Carey. Or am I wrong?

er

but unless im missing something, we won, and we proved that the document was not the honest and accurate copy

so, we won, in the Court of Appeal

[basa48]

Re: CCA Requests - any point?

er

but unless im missing something, we won, and we proved that the document was not the honest and accurate copy

so, we won, in the Court of Appeal

Of course, I understand that, and it is a great win. It wasn't really meant as a criticism.

In my case(s) I have photocopies of the 'agreement(s)' as sent by the creditor, so there is no point in the creditor 'reconstructing' in my cases.

I will be fighting the s61(1) / 127(3) route as Carey can be argued to only be useful for s78.

I'm really still trying to understand the implications of this win. It still seems we need somehow to prove the recon is not accurate compared to the actual, which is difficult if the debtor doesn't have a copy original.

[toomanycalls]

Re: CCA Requests - any point?

we won, in the Court of Appeal

Great result, nice to hear of the positives.

[pt2537]

Re: CCA Requests - any point?

Of course, I understand that, and it is a great win. It wasn't really meant as a criticism.

In my case(s) I have photocopies of the 'agreement(s)' as sent by the creditor, so there is no point in the creditor 'reconstructing' in my cases.

I will be fighting the s61(1) / 127(3) route as Carey can be argued to only be useful for s78.

I'm really still trying to understand the implications of this win. It still seems we need somehow to prove the recon is not accurate compared to the actual, which is difficult if the debtor doesn't have a copy original.

the devil was in the detail.

Mr Kotecha did not have the original agreeement either, but we had enough points to challenge

you can also ascertain the points from things such as registered addresses, from things like other files, other cases, etc

[volvodriver]

Re: CCA Requests - any point?

It still seems we need somehow to prove the recon is not accurate compared to the actual, which is difficult if the debtor doesn't have a copy original.

So you have to obtain every bit of paper you can from the original creditor, and the DCA, by using SAR and CPR, and then conduct a forensic examination to try and find the inconsistencies which might be there.

It has been made much harder - its not impossible, and this judgement means that even one inconsistency can throw doubt on any reconstruction which OCs and DCAs allegedly fabricate/manipulate/obfuscate/whatever else they might do.

Vdr

[basa48]

Re: CCA Requests - any point?

So you have to obtain every bit of paper you can from the original creditor, and the DCA, by using SAR and CPR, and then conduct a forensic examination to try and find the inconsistencies which might be there.

It has been made much harder - its not impossible, and this judgement means that even one inconsistency can throw doubt on any reconstruction which OCs and DCAs allegedly fabricate/manipulate/obfuscate/whatever else they might do.

Vdr

Vdr - thx for that. I see better where this helps now.

I have one agreement that has been 'fudged/photoshopped' or whatever to look compliant. Unfortunately the T&Cs are illegible, so they helpfully provided a clearer full size version. Even more unfortunately the setting out of the paragraphs on one do not quite match the other.

[Angry Cat]

Re: CCA Requests - any point?

a reconstitued agreement showing £12 fees (circa 2006) for an earlier agreement would clearly be different in substance and would show that the alleged reconstruction was not of the origianl

i recently had mbna provide a illegible alleged agreement in response to s78 and in an application for a SJ- and then accompanied it with a "more legible" copy for the assistance of the court- which had a totally different heading and could not have been of the same agreement-in substance - it also had a different form of words so I challenged that this was really a more legible copy of the former document- and suggested that what the claimant had done was simply "grabbed" a similar type of agreement from that year- of which the claimant had many.... and so the judge directly asked the claimants counsel if this was so- and she admitted that her client "may have" made a more legible copy- not of the agreement it purported to be of- but of a "similar" agreement "in order to assist the court"

needless to say the judge was far from impressed and dismissed the application and costs.

It's called, attempting to pull the wool over ones eyes, DD.
Attempting to 'mislead the consumer'. They've been doing it for years...!

[Angry Cat]

Re: CCA Requests - any point?

it is an uphill struggle, i have to admit,

...there are people out there who do have the documents to help us prove our cases, we just need to find them

I have found one and that is awaiting the formal handing down of another judgment, from the High Court

Brilliant!

The 'many' people, are just sitting on the sidelines, waiting...

[pt2537]

Re: CCA Requests - any point?

Brilliant!

The 'many' people, are just sitting on the sidelines, waiting...

we found one with a complete history including envelopes dating back to 1998 and all original docs

i really cant go much further at the moment, but, the High Court judgment is damming


It also helps to compare documents. a doc library would be helpful, and worth putting together, it would allow people to compare and contrast