BBC News - Credit card debt cases face showdown

DarkConvict

Legal test cases at the end of this month will affect the enforceability of hundreds of millions of pounds worth of credit card debts and other loans.
Five days have been set aside at the High Court in Manchester to hear 12 separate cases that will help to determine a variety of legal issues under the Consumer Credit Act (CCA).
Several are being brought on behalf of clients of a prominent claims management company, Cartel Client Review.
Its boss, Carl Wright, hopes that favourable decisions will lay down some legal ground rules that will force banks and card companies to settle thousands of similar cases on his books.
"We want the judges to rule on these claims, providing precedents which will prevent the banks and credit card companies delaying on paying out on consumer claims any longer," Mr Wright says.

Read More - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8365018.stm

Wonder if this will have much impact?

never-in-doubt

DarkConvict wrote: »

Read More - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8365018.stm

Wonder if this will have much impact?

I don't think that particular case has much impact, nor do I think the recent McGuffick case did either (slightly different cos that is relating to data being passed to the CRA's at time of default). However, the 12 test cases will, IMO have some impact, if not change the way unenforceability is handled from here-on-in..

impetus

For the better or for the worse, depending on which side of the fence you sit of course?

captainhaggis

Maybe I'm being naive here but the CCA laws seem fairly.... black and white to me. There is a list of things that a creditor must supply and the Consumer Credit Act dictates that if they cannot do so, the debt becomes unenforceable.

I don't understand how a judge can rule against established legislation? We make new laws or re-write acts to change things as needed but when those laws/rules/regulations have been put in place, there shouldn't be a need to go before a judge. The agreements, according to the act, are either enforceable or they're not.

10past6

captainhaggis wrote: »

I don't understand how a judge can rule against established legislation?

Many “DJ” District Judges are NOT familiar with Consumer legislation, DJ deal with a whole range of cases, Consumer Credit just happens to be one of them, if the “Defendant” does NOT provide the required legislation to show what breaches in egislation the claimant has made, then the DJ makes a ruling believing the claimant is correct :rolleyes:

Even when a defendant produces the correct legislation, it has been known for a DJ to take it upon themselves to over rule the legislation :rolleyes: :rolleyes: that's when the defendant has a right of appeal on a point of law to a Circuit Judge

captainhaggis

10past6 wrote: »

Many “DJ” District Judges are NOT familiar with Consumer legislation, DJ deal with a whole range of cases, Consumer Credit just happens to be one of them, if the “Defendant” does NOT provide the required legislation to show what breaches in egislation the claimant has made, then the DJ makes a ruling believing the claimant is correct :rolleyes:

Even when a defendant produces the correct legislation, it has been known for a DJ to take it upon themselves to over rule the legislation :rolleyes: :rolleyes: that's when the defendant has a right of appeal on a point of law to a Circuit Judge

Well that's just ridiculous (not your reply - the system).

If someone is going to make a judgement that could impact my entire life, I want to know this person knows what the bliddy hell he or she is talking about. If that means having judges with special areas of expertise, so be it.

It shouldn't be the job of either a defendant or a claimant to educate a judge about the law......

never-in-doubt

Thus the result of the 12 test cases will help and set precedents for future DJ's....

fermi

never-in-doubt wrote: »

Thus the result of the 12 test cases will help and set precedents for future DJ's....

Which the most ill informed or prejudiced ones will no doubt ignore as well. :rolleyes:

But point taken.......................... :cool:

fermi

never-in-doubt wrote: »

Thus the result of the 12 test cases will help and set precedents for future DJ's....

Given the bank charges decision, I now don't expect much from those decisions.

never-in-doubt

Oh My God! What a chuffin joke.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8376906.stm

Trollfever

The OFT can now put their resources into clamping down on the behaviour of the Debt Collection Agencies.