PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

[nightwatch]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

Well done,really Chuffed for you both,
A Great win all round xxxx

[Susie]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

Wow, congratulations on a great win. What a team and what a result, although it must have been very stressful to be going through through the result will have made it worthwhile

[julian]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

Well done. Hopefully they will now revisit all their assignment and stop torturing others. It would be nice to see all of them dissolved (in acid baths, if poss)

[Joanna Connolly]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

Thanks for this Di - pretty impressive stuff all round, I must say. Chuffed for you

I do hope Jo got £38k in costs like - that would be extra special haha

You are kidding! Nowhere near - and mostly counsels fees etc.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

It was a gruelling three day trial in a surreal setting where I was both the Defendant (a perceived "debt-avoider") and part of my own legal team

The assignment issue (and therefore the judgment) is important especially for those debtors who had their MBNA accounts assigned to Varde before being assigned again to Aktiv Katpital. Both were fronted by Experto Credite so many debtors may not have known who actually owned the debt.

This is why I keep asking forum members if the name Varde or Experto Credite means anything to them.

The claim was for £38k but with legal costs it became almost double that. Eeek. Anyway thanks to Jo I not only didn't have to pay PRA, they had to pay my legal costs.

Oh, and I lost 7 lbs due to the stress so not all bad

Di

Thanks for this Di - pretty impressive stuff all round, I must say. Chuffed for you

I do hope Jo got £38k in costs like - that would be extra special haha

[Phoenix]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

Wow, this is really awesome!

Jo and Plan B - what a team!

As Niddy so rightly says, there is always hope ...

And why, oh why do I comfort eat when I am stressed out???

[cymruambyth]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

It was a gruelling three day trial in a surreal setting where I was both the Defendant (a perceived "debt-avoider") and part of my own legal team

Oh, and I lost 7 lbs due to the stress so not all bad

Di

A double bonus

[PlanB]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

Well done Di & great work Joanna

It was a gruelling three day trial in a surreal setting where I was both the Defendant (a perceived "debt-avoider") and part of my own legal team

The assignment issue (and therefore the judgment) is important especially for those debtors who had their MBNA accounts assigned to Varde before being assigned again to Aktiv Katpital. Both were fronted by Experto Credite so many debtors may not have known who actually owned the debt.

This is why I keep asking forum members if the name Varde or Experto Credite means anything to them.

The claim was for £38k but with legal costs it became almost double that. Eeek. Anyway thanks to Jo I not only didn't have to pay PRA, they had to pay my legal costs.

Oh, and I lost 7 lbs due to the stress so not all bad

Di

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

Awesome. Well done Di & great work Joanna

* there's always hope & when you've lost all hope come speak to the best legal team

[PlanB]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

I have full knowledge of this case since I was the Defendant (Plan B is Diana Mayhew).

I was also the "Client" of Joanna Connolly Solicitors where I currently work. How ironical.

I have no shame in being taken to court for a debt which arose with MBNA when I was in "financial chaos" at the start of the Credit Crunch which was caused by the banks not me or any of you other debtors out there.

But I didn't personally owe PRA any money (as agreed by Recorder Bellamy) and that was the reason I decided to fight this case.

I wasn't only doing it for me, I was doing it for all the other debtors who've been served with claims for a MBNA debt which travelled the same assignment route as mine.

I was also doing it because the documents produced by the Claimant needed forensic examination. As Jo has said the court found them irredeemably unenforceable. There were two claims for two accounts and both credit agreements failed the test in court.

It was a win for the consumer not just me.

PRA have said that they will not be appealing the judgment.

Di x

[cymruambyth]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

Brilliant, congratulations on an excellent job; AAD is extremely fortunate in being able to call on you for guidance.

I think that all planb's cases appear to show posters that there is hope and that it is in the attention to detail.

[Joanna Connolly]

‘“RECONSTITUTED AGREEMENT” – IRREDEEMABLY UNENFORCEABLE”
“UNREDACTED DEEDS OF ASSIGNMENT – NO ASSIGMENT PROVED”


So, held Recorder Bellamy in PRA Group (UK) Limited v Mayhew at Central London County Court on 22nd March 2017, at the end of a 3 day multi track trial, when dismissing PRA’s claim against our client.


Stale debts sued for on the back of 2 ‘reconstituted’ MBNA credit card agreements (May 1999 and October 2000) were held irredeemably unenforceable under CCA 1974. The evidence of an honest witness was preferred to that of so called “reconstituted agreements”.


After 3 days of close forensic examination of, and legal argument about, evidence and documents from both PRA and MBNA stating that our client’s specific debt had been assigned, the court held that no assignment had been proved.


Efforts, over many months, in earlier cases to force PRA into disclosure of un-redacted deeds and deep and sustained forensic challenge to the provenance of documents needed to prove regulatory compliance, finally drew back the veil. The reality behind bulk debt purchasing was revealed.


This decision shows that just saying an agreement is enforceable and producing a “reconstituted” copy does not prove that it is enforceable. Just saying an agreement has been assigned and producing a notice saying it has been assigned does not prove legal assignment.


Debt purchasers need to provide proof. If that means the pitifully few pence in the pound they pay for stale debts will increase because banks will now have to start keeping original evidence complying with regulatory consumer protection measures, it is hard to imagine many tears being shed, outside the City of London.