Elephant in the room

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Elephant in the room

Thanks Niddy. So this is interesting, and for me makes it actually important to get a 'true copy' of the executed agreement, as if there are cancellation rights in the agreement then its important to see them.

So if a creditor serves a default notice on a debtor, would this be sufficient to classed as 'cancellation'?

Or does a debtor have to service a default notice and then send a cancellation notice?

Well my interpretation is that if the creditor fails in any element of s.64 (ss.1-4) then ss5 kicks in meaning it would become unexecuted.

A cancellable agreement is not properly executed if the requirements of this section are not observed.

However that said, you would always check the cancellation notice on the agreement to check it complies.

[SaltnVinegar]

Re: Elephant in the room

Well my interpretation is that if the creditor fails in any element of s.64 (ss.1-4) then ss5 kicks in meaning it would become unexecuted.

Ooooo this could be interesting

I am going to check this on anything sent to me in the future as I am sure that most creditors haven't sent any sort of cancellation notice so will see what the terms state!

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Elephant in the room

Ooooo this could be interesting

I am going to check this on anything sent to me in the future as I am sure that most creditors haven't sent any sort of cancellation notice so will see what the terms state!

The cancellation notice USUALLY comes with the agreement, normally it's found at the base of the actual agreement itself.

[SaltnVinegar]

Re: Elephant in the room

The cancellation notice USUALLY comes with the agreement, normally it's found at the base of the actual agreement itself.

If a creditor can find an agreement in the first place

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Elephant in the room

If a creditor can find an agreement in the first place

well yea, that's a good starting point I guess

One thing to note, most recons do not show any cancellation rights - they tend to ensure the PT's are present. Bear that in mind

[cardiac arrest]

Re: Elephant in the room

I presume if an application form states 'Once you sign this agreement you will have for a short time,the right to cancel it. Exact details of how and when you can do this will be sent to you later by us' ? then that fulfills the requirement ?

[Paul.]

Re: Elephant in the room

Your DJ was a twat then....?

no the DJ was correct sadly

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Elephant in the room

no the DJ was correct sadly

Nonsense. They are still a twat! A date stamp is not a signature - maybe in the crazy ass legal minefield that supports consumer credit but in real life, never!

Yes an X can be a signature but the fact is for it to be properly executed the agreement should be signed by both the debtor and creditor so how the hell does that work if the creditor doesn't sign it?

[Paul.]

Re: Elephant in the room

Nonsense. They are still a twat! A date stamp is not a signature - maybe in the crazy ass legal minefield that supports consumer credit but in real life, never!

Yes an X can be a signature but the fact is for it to be properly executed the agreement should be signed by both the debtor and creditor so how the hell does that work if the creditor doesn't sign it?

Goodman v J Eban [1954] 1 QB 550, 561

A stamp, "X" or other marking can be a signature for the purposes of executing a document

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Elephant in the room

Goodman v J Eban [1954] 1 QB 550, 561

A stamp, "X" or other marking can be a signature for the purposes of executing a document

Yep I agree with the X but a date stamp, come on mate!! Its from 1954 - draconian laws back then!

Bit like Waksman, go ahead and create stuff from thin air and convince us it's real and we'll find in your favour... fraud? Nah, it's perfectly acceptable cos banks never make mistakes so we have to trust what you say cos hey, you're always right

Cheers for clarifying, but the DJ is still a twat

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Elephant in the room

Mate if rectums issue a claim, I will use that and wipe my defence across my arse like loo-roll and send it back. I'll then state that "a marking is acceptable"

* you're a bad influence

[Paul.]

Re: Elephant in the room

Yep I agree with the X but a date stamp, come on mate!! Its from 1954 - draconian laws back then!

Bit like Waksman, go ahead and create stuff from thin air and convince us it's real and we'll find in your favour... fraud? Nah, it's perfectly acceptable cos banks never make mistakes so we have to trust what you say cos hey, you're always right

Cheers for clarifying, but the DJ is still a twat

and there are cases from 2002 and much later than that, its good law mate.

[vint1954]

Re: Elephant in the room

Would it not have to be a company seal rather than just a date stamp? if that one was to stand up.

[cymruambyth]

Re: Elephant in the room

and there are cases from 2002 and much later than that, its good law mate.

Which apparently wasn't known about on a certain other site

[Paul.]

Re: Elephant in the room

difficulty is, what effect would it have on the agreement if the creditor didnt sign it?

It would be improperly executed, thus the creditor needs a court order to enforce

The Court will not refuse such an order, there is no prejudice to the debtor