Have a look at this thread.. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?80427

Great result--very pleased for you:-D

Great result! Is that ear to ear grin making your face ache yet?

Really good to hear that justice has been done--some rays of sunshine are most welcome:-) I suggest you go the whole hog and have a second glass to toast the filleting:razz:

It's worth the trawl!

IMO that's open to 'abuse' by the creditor, as who knows what the original executed agreement looks like [assuming of course that one was ever executed by the Bank] --most of us have only ever seen a [poor] microfiche copy of one side of an application form

After the 'Brandon' judgement where the judge ruled that the charges were fine and dandy,any attempt to reclaim them now would appear to be a non starter AFAIK.

?????????????????????????????

8)

Beachcomber60-#5339 It would have been interesting if you had remedied the breach by paying the arrears requested in the DCA's default notice and put the account back to a position as if no breach had occurred. How would they have been able to run your credit card account?

Dad#813 If posted with UKMail on a Friday it would be unlikely to be delivered until late the following week. I received one from Halifax that arrived 12 days after the date on the D/N.

Hi Pru Probably best to start your own thread in the MBNA Section as this post is unlikely to be seen by many buried on page 64 of this thread.

So from the first link.... (3) For the purposes of this Act, a document sent by post to, or left at, the address last known to the server as the address of a person shall be treated as sent by post to, or left at, his proper address. The time scale for such is then contained in... With effect from 16 April 1985 the Practice Direction issued on 30 July 1968 is hereby revoked and the following is substituted therefore. 1). Under S7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 service by post is deemed to have been effected, unless the contrary has been proved, at the time when the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post. 2). To avoid uncertainty as to the date of service it will be taken (subject to proof to the contrary) that delivery in the ordinary course of post was effected:- (a) in the case of first class mail, on the second working day after posting; (b) in the case of second class mail, on the fourth working day after posting. "Working days" are Monday to Friday, excluding any bank holiday. 3). Affidavits of service shall state whether the document was dispatched by first or second class mail. If this information is omitted it will be assumed that second class mail was used. 4). This direction is subject to the special provisions of RSC Order 10, rule 1(3) relating to the service of originating process. 8th March 1985 J R BICKFORD SMITH Senior Master Queen's Bench Division 3. Further to point 2 above, CPR rules on service also state the required timescales to be given for serving of documents :- Under CPR 6.26 First class post (or other service which provides for delivery on the next business day) is deemed to be "served" The second day after it was posted, left with, delivered to or collected by the relevant service provider provided that day is a business day. So why do 2 judges disagree with this?

AFAIK Recorded delivery only covers for £41 in compensation. If you're sure of your facts I'd advise you to contact Royal Mail and request theie fraud department investigates the situation around the 'recalled' delivery--won't help with Iqor but might result in obtaining useful information to be used if you take the 'buyer' to small claims.

Hi DD Good to see you getting your teeth into this8-)

Not questioning your integrity,as I know the problems that can occur with ebay as they usually side with the buyer in any dispute,but your posts do not fully explain the situation. I assume that for 'contacted post office' you actually mean contacted 'Royal Mail' or 'ParcelForce'? Track and Trace shows the address to which the item was delivered. AFAIK it is not possible to 'recall' a parcel once it has entered the mail system. What was the nature of the item? Was it of a delicate nature? As the item was worth £300 was it sent by Special Delivery? If the item was damaged on arrival any investigation would require the packaging to be retain for possible inspection and if the item was broken why did the buyer accept the delivery as good by signing for it in the first place? Any claim against the Royal mail would probably hinge on this. Are you a trader or a genuine private seller?

My guess is that you'll be in for a veeeeeeeery long wait:!:

Bit of an unlikely story IMO.. ''he then contacted the post office, arranged for the delivery address to be changed to his address...'' but in any case ebay/paypal require proof of receipt--on line signature-- not proof of posting

Basa48 see my reply http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?196312-Invalid-Default-Notices&p=3168875&viewfull=1#post3168875 to pb's post

Of equal concern is the recent absence of long standing posters to this and other threads. Some have indicated that they will no longer post for various reasons but others seem to have disappeared into the ether.

8-)8-)8-)

peterbard I thought that if the 1974 CCA covered an agreement it is a regulated agreement not an unregulated one? Yes agree that a DN is a simple and basic document but you say ... but the information is supplied to the borrower to enable the borrower to remedy the breach within a specific time. The problem, as your post illustrates, is that after 36 years of practice [and in your case thousands of posts] the lenders still often fail to supply the correct information and this is the cause of so many of the ensuing problems.

What opinion does your solicitor have of this?

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/reports/article6995381.ece it has Mr David Uff and Mr James Malam for Carey Judge Waksman, QC, sitting as a Queen’s Bench Division judge, so held in the Mercantile Court at Manchester, when considering six preliminary issues of law in eight selected cases concerning requests for copies of credit card agreements pursuant to section 78 of the 1974 Act: Emma Carey against HSBC Bank plc; Shafeel Younis against Barclays Bank plc; Samantha Conniff against Barclays Bank; Mohammed Adris against the Royal Bank of Scotland plc; Brian Backwell against the Royal Bank of Scotland; Rajan Mandal against the Royal Bank of Scotland; Andrew Light against MBNA Europe Bank Ltd; and Robert Atkinson against Bank of Scotland plc, with the Office of Fair Trading intervening in all cases. Additionally, two applications by the Royal Bank of Scotland and Barclays Bank that the claims of Mohammed Adris and Shafeel Yunis, respectively, had no real prospect of success and should be struck out were granted. Mr David Uff and Mr James Malam for Carey, Conniff, Backwell and Light; Mrs Zoe Thompson and Miss Laura D’Cruz for Yunis; Mr Julian Gun Cuninghame and Mr Bradley Say for Adris, Mandal and Atkinson; Ms Sonia Tolaney and Mr James Macdonald for HSBC Bank; Mr Andrew Mitchell for Barclays Bank; Mr Bankim Thanki, QC and Ms Julia Smith for the Royal Bank of Scotland; Mr Geriant Howells for MBNA Europe Bank; Mr Fred Philpott for Bank of Scotland; Mr Stephen Neville for the Office of Fair Trading

In this article reporting their 'success' are the lines... ''... the lender can only seize and sell the car if it's parked in a public place such as on the road. If it's on private land (eg in a garage or on a drive) a Court order is needed.'' so should make for an interesting case