Judge and Priestley / aktiv kapital

[Irw3en3r]

Re: MBNA deed of assignment

It is an old account, you have viewed the other documents they sent. Not sure how to give you a link but if you follow my username maybe you can find them to remind yourself

[nemesis45]

Re: MBNA deed of assignment

Ok I'll try and find your thread and ask the site team to merge so it's easier to follow.

nem

[Irw3en3r]

Re: MBNA deed of assignment

Hi nem
did you manage to find the other thread ?

[nemesis45]

Re: MBNA deed of assignment

Yes read it through and rechecked the documents supplied and I still think the alleged agreement is not complete.
nem

[Irw3en3r]

Re: MBNA deed of assignment

Hi everyone
this is my witness statement
any suggestions or comments would be gratefully received
many thanks
irw

[Irw3en3r]

Re: Judge and Priestley / aktiv kapital

Bump

[Irw3en3r]

Re: Judge and Priestley / aktiv kapital

Bump

[basa48]

Re: Judge and Priestley / aktiv kapital

In my opinion, if there is any reference on the signature page to the T&CS in the second attachment, e.g. 'overleaf' or 'attached' then the agreement would probably be enforceable.

Check also if the signature page refers to clauses that aren't there or incorrectly numbered. This can point to the T&Cs supplied weren't same as the ones that should have been supplied at inception.

Incidentally, in your witness statement I don't think you should be arguing about compliance with the Act. Leave that for the court hearing.

[Irw3en3r]

Re: Judge and Priestley / aktiv kapital

Interesting....... There is a number reference that links the original documents but that number doesn't exist on the "new" t's& c's.
it only refers to the interest rate will not change for six months, even though there is no mention of what the interest rate is !!
but no mention of the words "attached or overleaf"

[FlamingParrot]

Re: MBNA deed of assignment

Hi everyone
this is my witness statement
any suggestions or comments would be gratefully received
many thanks
irw

A few comments:

• 3. A photocopy would be a true copy unless it had been altered in any way.
• 6. You are making an assertion that those T&Cs were not issued to you at the time of inception. Do you know this because you remember how you applied for this card and the terms weren't there (for example, if you filled in a form from a magazine ad)? Or are you saying those are not the terms because of discrepancies such late payment charges, interest rates, etc.? There's a difference between there not having been a properly executed agreement with all the prescribed terms to start with, and them not having provided you with a full copy of your agreement including the terms at inception. I'd leave out the points of law such as the fact that the terms should be dismissed because of the CCA 2006 and concentrate on whether they were or weren't there at inception; a WS is a sequence of events rather than a statement of the law.
• 7. As above, I'd remove most of item 7 as it doesn't belong on a WS, it looks more like a skeleton argument. The WS relates to the events that took place, not what the CCA says should have happened.
• On the second page, you start referring to yourself as 'the defendant' rather than in the first person as you did on the first page which is the way it should be as it's your own WS.
• I would remove all the legal points on the second page but leave the bit referring to the PPI as item 7, however, I'd remove the reference to the ruling for the reasons above and just describe what happened with the PPI, i.e. that despite ticking that you did not want PPI, you were charged for it (if that's what happened).
• On the next paragraph, I'd elaborate with regards to having requested further info regarding the PPI, was it via a SAR? Did you write to MBNA specifically about PPI? Keep using the first person rather than 'the defendant'.
• 8. I'm not sure how relevant this is or whether you could even state that there wasn't a term saying the debt could be sold. If it was years ago, would you really remember each and every term?

[Irw3en3r]

Re: Judge and Priestley / aktiv kapital

I'm unsure if I mentioned unenforeabilty on my court forms, do I have to notify the courts about a change of defence ??
many thanks in advance........

[Irw3en3r]

Re: Judge and Priestley / aktiv kapital

Bump

[Irw3en3r]

Re: Judge and Priestley / aktiv kapital

Bump

[nemesis45]

Re: Judge and Priestley / aktiv kapital

I'm unsure if I mentioned unenforeabilty on my court forms, do I have to notify the courts about a change of defence ??
many thanks in advance........

If you wish to amend the defence yes,
Did you not keep a copy of your defence submission?

nem

[Irw3en3r]

Re: Judge and Priestley / aktiv kapital

No, I didn't make a copy of the forms.
im sure I didn't mention that I think the agreement might be unenforceable in my opinion.
Whats my best move?
do I have to submit a new form or can I leave it until the hearing??


many thanks