Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

[Paul.]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

I was under the impression that anything post-April 2007 was impossible to challenge as the court is not prevented from enforcing by s127...

post april 07 you need something extra

such as telephone harrasment or unfairness of some kind.

then the court will be more likely to find in your favour

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

I was under the impression that anything post-April 2007 was impossible to challenge as the court is not prevented from enforcing by s127...

not at all, the only thing they can't do is deem it unenforceable as s.127 has gone.

We still have s.78 failings, s.87/s.88 DN failings and unfair relationship matters etc - loads of other points, just not the actual s.127 that you all seek

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

^^^ Thanks Paul - missed that whilst I was replying and talking

[PriorityOne]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

I think people are hoping for a way of challenging post-2007 agreements before it reaches court stage..... or at least, throwing a spanner in the works by asking for a "proof positive" response early on from whoever's chasing.... and then planning a strategy from that point on, depending on the response given.

[jen_br]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

Hey I know about forgery! we had TSB forges DH's signature and then to go as far as to put on the "application" in a side bar -- Add that his moms madien name is XXXXXX

awesome.

[PriorityOne]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

I think people are hoping for a way of challenging post-2007 agreements before it reaches court stage..... or at least, throwing a spanner in the works by asking for a "proof positive" response early on from whoever's chasing.... and then planning a strategy from that point on, depending on the response given.

So...... do people think it's worth trying to draft a template for post-2007 accounts while things are still in the pre-court stage?.... ..... based upon the "proof purpose" argument?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

So...... do people think it's worth trying to draft a template for post-2007 accounts while things are still in the pre-court stage?.... ..... based upon the "proof purpose" argument?

Honest answer - I personally see no benefit in it.

At the end of the day we kinda have to concede post 07 as unlucky. The last thing I want is anyone here being a guinea pig for precedent. Sorry but that's the way it'd fall and rightly or wrongly I can't exactly promote it as its just way too risky.

You're playing a pair of 4's against J's and the odds of a third 4 dropping in are very slim.

[oscar]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

You're playing a pair of 4's against J's and the odds of a third 4 dropping in are very slim.

Same as another J or any other card - but your losing at the start anyway.

Would never play a pair of fours anyway!

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

- but your losing at the start anyway.

forget the cards; you've picked up on my point perfectly.

It's a non starter, unfortunately.

[oscar]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

forget the cards; .

NO! - I reckon we should have a game ..... reckon I could clear my debt with your money!!

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

NO! - I reckon we should have a game ..... reckon I could clear my debt with your money!!

What money? Steve rung earlier - wants to spend even more

Niddy has no money

(guess we're only having two Cuban hacienda's this year eh )

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

To clarify I'm not saying forget it but I am suggesting that on an individual case by case basis then yea we can look at other options but we can't generalise them into templates as they'll be so unique snd specific to each case it'd be almost impossible to template something.

So whilst I think yea, the unfairness battle is worth considering I do think we need to look at an as-and-if position. We simply can't generalise. To be honest with post 07 court claims I would refer straight to Paul as he would then look at ALL the relevant points thus saving us a job and the debtor any possible later damage/embarrassment.

Hope I'm making sense

[PriorityOne]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

To clarify I'm not saying forget it but I am suggesting that on an individual case by case basis then yea we can look at other options but we can't generalise them into templates as they'll be so unique snd specific to each case it'd be almost impossible to template something.

So whilst I think yea, the unfairness battle is worth considering I do think we need to look at an as-and-if position. We simply can't generalise. To be honest with post 07 court claims I would refer straight to Paul as he would then look at ALL the relevant points thus saving us a job and the debtor any possible later damage/embarrassment.

Hope I'm making sense

Ok..... no worries. It is hard to generalise, I agree....

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

We would never just vulantarily say "it's post 07 - pay up". Sod that

What we do is blag it. Still get the cca in some cases (lender dependant) and then blag it till the user thinks the bank is getting serious at which point I cannot suggest much as if the bank then do take action: who's going to be blamed? Me.

I'm not the owner of another forum and I will not use anyone here as a test case guinea pig. Even if they begged I'd still ask them to do it in a private thread with legal advice as I'd never jeapordise the other 1000 or so users that rely on us. The forum comes first - it has to. Thus you see changes to staff etc even though it's not what I always want, however it's ALWAYS in the best interests of the forum as a whole.

Hope I'm making sense. I don't bottle it, but I don't encourage a user to be an idiot either. When you've lost, accept it and move on to the next. Shit happens sadly.

[PriorityOne]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

We would never just vulantarily say "it's post 07 - pay up". Sod that

What we do is blag it. Still get the cca in some cases (lender dependant) and then blag it till the user thinks the bank is getting serious at which point I cannot suggest much as if the bank then do take action: who's going to be blamed? Me.

I'm not the owner of another forum and I will not use anyone here as a test case guinea pig. Even if they begged I'd still ask them to do it in a private thread with legal advice as I'd never jeapordise the other 1000 or so users that rely on us. The forum comes first - it has to. Thus you see changes to staff etc even though it's not what I always want, however it's ALWAYS in the best interests of the forum as a whole.

Hope I'm making sense. I don't bottle it, but I don't encourage a user to be an idiot either. When you've lost, accept it and move on to the next. Shit happens sadly.

Yes.... no matter how you look at it, there is an element of "guinea pig" about challenging 07 agreements..... if I had been through the entire pre-court process myself with an 07 agreement, it would be different.

The forum has to come first as you say, otherwise people will lose the trust in us.