Hi there, not been on in a while but just updating this thread. Managed to get £6500 back in PPi paid direct into bank !! Thankyou for people that helped the one thing I will say is that NR only agreed to refund it if a new loan agreement was signed.

Yes pm me i dont think i am able to say on here.

Thanks oilyrag for that info....

I paid a cmc company 2 years ago to do this for me and they have passed it to a solicitor. I am quite happy not to go to court however I paid £2000 so I would like some sort of outcome. I am in total agreement with oyu though and that has always been my stance. It seems I might know more next month when they come back to me on the issue !

Thanks for that oilyrag...I will start my own threads if need be to defend my cases in the furture. Can I ask which solicitors you used in case I need to change? I dont want to be an LIP dont think I would have the confidence in court lol

I agree !!

Your application from was the same as mine from 04 it clearly states at the top you will find a copy of the terms and conditions with your application pack and also states attached to this application you will find important inforamtion realting to your account. I fully sympathise with you..... Mine is exactly the same and I agree with you but my solicitors seem to think different. It is being tested in court I think next month !

Solicitors have confimed all on hold until outcome of next case. Case management conference is in early feb and they will come back to me after then !

Thanks for that I knew already but I paid them £2000 to attack attack attack as they claimed they could Lol

Forgot to say that it is best to use s61 as defence rather then attack and that way it is uo to creditor to prove !

I just spoke to the solicitors who have said that they are not pursuing claims under s77/78 anymore obviously. They are in meetings with chambers to decide how best to proceed with the tech breaches. They said it would depend on whether they could get someone to take them on on a no win no fee basis and only if over 60% chance of winning and also if they could get the insurance to cover them in case they lost. They also confirmed that no ruling was actually made in regard to s61. They said that all cases are on hold until the outome of their meetings but that they felt if they sent the application form along with original t &C containing prescibed terms then they would probably not be successful !!

It would seem that out of the 8 cards I had only 2 refer to terms being attached to application form and in light of what Judge waksman said these 2 may not be successful ...However what they claim to be original is printed froma computer so who knows ??

I think I am In agreement and I have been looking at other sites. I think I am right in saying that the judge has not actually ruled on s61 as this article says: Edit: What is interesting is that HHJ Waksman declined making a judgement on the provisions of s61. All he would say is that on the 'assumed' facts and principles the terms were contained, but the scenarios required further elaboration to give an answer. So how my firm of solicitors can make a decision on something that has not been ruled upon yet is anybodies guess !! Can anyone confirm that this is so and when we might get a more definitive answer from the court.

I have a firm of solicitors who have been dealing with my case. 2 are halifax cards the same as this with the same paperwork. they have decided not to go ahead after the test case result on the basis that they would not be successful as the application form refers to the T&C in the application pack and therefore they have concluded that this would be enforcable....?????

Hey Saddler, we going to Cannock this weekend to visit friends lol