Hello, been reading loads but still unsure.

[PlanB]

Re: Hello, been reading loads but still unsure.

My understanding was that the main issue in your case was with the supply and sigining of the store card and its T&C's, then problems with the 'upgrade' to a credit card being incorrrectly carried out. It is a while since I read it, but that's what I remember as the main issues. .

Your understanding is a misunderstanding of the bigger picture and I don't want to perpetuate that same myth. Please don't see this as a personal attack. I simply want to help members of this website to understand their legal rights

[labman]

Re: Hello, been reading loads but still unsure.

No, I know it's not a personal attack - it's something, unsurprisingly, you feel strongly about.

I don't think I do misunderstand, I'm just not going into detail. You commented on there being more than one way to skin a cat (in law); I could say there's more than one way to skin a lion. Two related, but completely different beasts. The cat you posted up was turned into the lion with no new agreement, despite the fact the original had been modified - no new agreement, no new T&C's, completely different terms.

It's easier to read the judgment, but I believe my understanding is fair - we've never discussed it, so without writing in detail here, I don't think you can say it's a misunderstanding.

This thread is not about your case though, hence my brevity, but consider yourself well and truly added to the list!

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Hello, been reading loads but still unsure.

At the end of the day, only a judge can declare an agreement unenforceable. :juge:

The rest of us can only really make an educated guess. :decision: The UE process is largely intended to stay away from court until the debt goes SBd by challenging the account and communicating with creditors with the intention of dissuading them from issuing a claim. It is also intended to offer a certain amount of cover to the debtor in case the creditor issues a claim or a SD, by paving the ground with a CCA request and letters where applicable.

The general principles are the same regardless of the account type and, as this is an open discussion forum, we can all comment based on both our own experiences and what we've seen on this and other forums. There is no need to be 'accredited' or 'on the list' to comment.

[labman]

Re: Hello, been reading loads but still unsure.

Indeed no 'list' exists other than in my head. I was trying to help the OP by suggesting people (among others) who I thought would be well placed to help, which is what the forum is about - helping.

In a similar way I always think of Bill, Turbo and Di30 for ppi. That's not to say others can't help, or possibly help much more effectively. It's purely who springs into my mind, and my clearly unsuccessful to help.

I actually said in the dreaded post 78:

None of them can say for sure whether or not it is unenforceable, but they can give their opinion on whether or not it is, and why they think that.

[PlanB]

Re: Hello, been reading loads but still unsure.

The general principles are the same regardless of the account type and, as this is an open discussion forum, we can all comment based on both our own experiences and what we've seen on this and other forums. There is no need to be 'accredited' or 'on the list' to comment.

:amen:

[labman]

Re: Hello, been reading loads but still unsure.

I seemed to have got missed off that list of competent people to take a view on unenforceable credit agreements.

Originally Posted by FlamingParrot

There is no need to be 'accredited' or 'on the list' to comment.

:amen:

What she who made the point about it said! ray2: :amen:

[charitynjw]

Re: Hello, been reading loads but still unsure.

You can put me on the 'Eh?' list, then!