Bye bye unenforceables?

**riverton** · 07-05-09

So...

Some arsehole ruined it for everyone then

A test case is now underway and all cases are on hold, so if the courts rule in favour of the banks then i assume this side of claims is totally out the window.

Any ideas on the next money spinner?

**Flex-Finance** · 07-05-09

Oh no!

Are debtors going to have to live up to there commitments now?

Seriously. Not good for business but it was kind of inevitable when so many companies join the gold rush.

**riverton** · 07-05-09

I reckon its business as usual for now but that said if it becomes well known that nothing is being processed how is it possible to charge a client for a service they cant get OR charges aside, getting your cases to a solicitor who cant pursue for now anyway?

And if the banks win then thats fee charging CMC's gone and roll on the next financial flaw!

**tomshaw12** · 07-05-09

I heard it was lee from one stop money shop (LCA group) that caused all of this!!!

**riverton** · 07-05-09

Lol the infamous Lee, single handidly killed trust and possibly Cartel Client Review

**Michael_Anthony** · 07-05-09

Anyone need a spare ticket for a bandwagon??

Apparently there are quite a few spare seats now available.

**123debtsolutions** · 07-05-09

Keep watching closely.
There is still plenty of life left in this product.

The knock on effect is more boom in DM ha

**riverton** · 08-05-09

Just spoke to Ultimate Law who released a statement to their customers and they have said all cases are on hold for an estimated 2 years!

Obviously nobody can be sure of that but we can be sure its going to cause a problem

Although, if PPI is still ok to reclaim back,what happens in the instance someone wants to further the claim as unenforceable as a result of a mis-sold PPi poilcy? The CCA says that if one part of the agreement is incorrect then it renders the rest of the product incorrect so surely thats looking at unenforceable from a slightly different standpoint and could may be a way round loan agreements still getting written off rather than just looking at flaws in a contract?

**xplosion** · 08-05-09

Originally Posted by riverton

Just spoke to Ultimate Law who released a statement to their customers and they have said all cases are on hold for an estimated 2 years!

Obviously nobody can be sure of that but we can be sure its going to cause a problem

Although, if PPI is still ok to reclaim back,what happens in the instance someone wants to further the claim as unenforceable as a result of a mis-sold PPi poilcy? The CCA says that if one part of the agreement is incorrect then it renders the rest of the product incorrect so surely thats looking at unenforceable from a slightly different standpoint and could may be a way round loan agreements still getting written off rather than just looking at flaws in a contract?

Have spoken to our solicitor who has spoken to a judges clerk at Chester County Court.Our understanding of the situation is :

a) No decision has been taken as yet whether to continue with claims going through the Court or to stay them pending the outcome of cases in the London Courts
(b) that any decision either way will only affect cases going through the Courts in Cheshire and no other area.
(c) it only applies to cases already in the Court system.

And after speaking to barristers in london,there is emphatically no suggestion that the right given to people to challenge regulated Agreements by virtue of the Consumer Credit Act 2006 is being challenged or curtailed in any way.

That is just our understanding,so business as usual.

**madladkent** · 08-05-09

Just had a chat with various claim firms and a majority are still taking on cases. My colleague at Cartel says it will not effect them as they never take the cases to the courts. Their in-house solicitors challenge the lenders on the clients behalf.

So this court decision will not effect companies who have their own solicitors challenging the lenders themselves. The companies that charge the fees and then send them straight to the courts are the ones that will struggle.

Just means we've got to be a bit more picky about who we refer clients to.

Onwards and upwards.

**gramtrad** · 10-05-09

Originally Posted by madladkent

Just had a chat with various claim firms and a majority are still taking on cases. My colleague at Cartel says it will not effect them as they never take the cases to the courts. Their in-house solicitors challenge the lenders on the clients behalf.

So this court decision will not effect companies who have their own solicitors challenging the lenders themselves. The companies that charge the fees and then send them straight to the courts are the ones that will struggle.

Just means we've got to be a bit more picky about who we refer clients to.

Onwards and upwards.

The way that any of these companies operate is to threaten court action and then, hopefully, settle before it gets to court. So, if they threaten legal action, lenders surely would turn around and say "sorry we cannot settle now - pending the test cases" !

Or have I missed something?

The amusing upside of all this is that anyone wishing to have a payment holiday on their loans and credit cards will challenge their agreements (maybe even on spurious grounds) and refuse to pay, pending the outcome of the test cases!

**Mogga** · 10-05-09

Originally Posted by Flex-Finance

Oh no!

Are debtors going to have to live up to there commitments now?

Seriously. Not good for business but it was kind of inevitable when so many companies join the gold rush.

If you are a taxpayer you should be up in arms that people can avoid paying their debts like this. It's insane.

**Mogga** · 10-05-09

Originally Posted by riverton

So...

Some arsehole ruined it for everyone then

A test case is now underway and all cases are on hold, so if the courts rule in favour of the banks then i assume this side of claims is totally out the window.

Any ideas on the next money spinner?

Do you have a URL?

**tom991** · 10-05-09

Two URL's:

**connect29** · 10-05-09

If the courts put a 'Stay' on these claims, as mentioned above, then surley that would mean that banks could not enforce ANY consumer credit agreement until the test cases are heard. That would mean two years of unenforcable debts for the whole country, I doubt any bank is going to want or allow that.