Cap1 & CCA return

[jster$$$]

Not a stupid question.

 

The easiest way to think about it is Woolwich and Barclays. If you were sold a personal loan with ppi by Woolwich (which no longer exisits) you would now claim against Barclays. Exactly the same with Bank Charges.

 

Funny you should say that, i've been there and done that. The only thing was Woolwich automatically transfered it to Barclays, none of this we are not liable rubbish. (very straight forward)Sadly not the case with this one. A big part of their defence is that they don't hold the burden (They then quote all this case law, they wont show be any contract between themselves and the OC, they say i'm not entitled to see it)

[make them aktiv runners]

I agree duties and liabilities have separate meanings. Link may have been deliberately trying to mislead into a discussion over the differences, however Goode did specify duties.

 

Under contract law neither liabilities nor duties can be assigned, unless specifically allowed within the contract. Assignment of contract: Legal advice - London lawyers

 

The problem for TS is they know CCA's do allow for duties to be assigned, however without the actual terms and conditions of the CCA itself there is no absolute proof. TS are left in catch 22 of having to abide by normal contract law due to absence of the CCA, that being duties cannot be assigned even though they know the probability of what is in the CCA.

 

There was a sticky asking people to send old terms and conditions to CAG. These would proof valuable in proving normal contract law does not apply and the creditor has indeed changed.

[MAGDA]

I agree duties and liabilities have separate meanings. Link may have been deliberately trying to mislead into a discussion over the differences, however Goode did specify duties.

 

Under contract law neither liabilities nor duties can be assigned, unless specifically allowed within the contract. Assignment of contract: Legal advice - London lawyers

 

The problem for TS is they know CCA's do allow for duties to be assigned, however without the actual terms and conditions of the CCA itself there is no absolute proof. TS are left in catch 22 of having to abide by normal contract law due to absence of the CCA, that being duties cannot be assigned even though they know the probability of what is in the CCA.

 

There was a sticky asking people to send old terms and conditions to CAG. These would proof valuable in proving normal contract law does not apply and the creditor has indeed changed.

 

My own terms and condition from the original FNB agreement state "FNB may assign, transfer or otherwise dispose of this agreement and any amounts owed to FNB hereunder to any person without the consent of the customer."

[MAGDA]

Just ordered this on Amazon.

Was only £12.00 plus P&P

 

HAK

 

That was good Hak, you never know, might give you a few more arrows to fire at the nasty DCA's

[angry cat]

Paulinus Seutonous...I hope that your motive is honourable?

 

AC

[pt2537]

Paulinus Seutonous...I hope that your motive is honourable?

 

AC

eh?

 

AC care to clarify what this comment means please? tis slightly confusing

[angry cat]

When a new member pop's up out of nowhere; names himself:

Seutonius.

 

I wonder?

 

Boadicea and Paulinus Seutonius!

 

Probably all is above board, but I for one feel uncomfortable...

 

AC

[pt2537]

When a new member pop's up out of nowhere; names himself:

Seutonius.

 

I wonder?

 

Boadicea and Paulinus Seutonius!

 

Probably all is above board, but I for one feel uncomfortable...

 

AC

sorry im still none the wiser on that one

 

but you obviously have your reasons so i shall leave it like that

[MAGDA]

When a new member pop's up out of nowhere; names himself:

Seutonius.

 

I wonder?

 

Boadicea and Paulinus Seutonius!

 

Probably all is above board, but I for one feel uncomfortable...

 

AC

 

I got the impression that he was probably a solicitor, as he seemed very knowledgeable on this area of law, and after watching the debate for some time, had decided to post his comments in order to help.

[foolishgirl]

 

Paulinus Seutonius!

 

AC

 

I'm curious too AC. Where does the Paulinus come from? I can only see Seutonius on his posts.

[foolishgirl]

OK - got it, the Boudica link...

[car2403]

I'm curious too AC. Where does the Paulinus come from? I can only see Seutonius on his posts.

 

I can't see it neither, but Gaius Suetonius Paullinus was a not very well known Roman that was keen on stamping out small pockets of revolutionaries, which is probably where some of the (albeit slightly presumptious and somewhat confused, IMHO) confusion may have come from.

 

I'm not big on Romans, but Wikipedia does come in handy, doesn't it?

 

Gaius Suetonius Paulinus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[tinkerbell20]

yup

[make them aktiv runners]

Paulinus Seutonous...I hope that your motive is honourable?

 

AC

 

Suetonius reminds me of another poster. I am not saying who. Nothing to be concerned about and motives are genuine.

 

Magda the terms and conditions you have together with Link's claim to TS they have absolute assignment prove they are the creditor. The only way they can attempt a way out is to rely on the contract between them and FNB having duties under normal contract law rather than the CCA terms & conditions. The latter possibility needs to be covered in your request by asking TS to deem the contract between Link & FNB flawed and therefore requires re-assignment to FNB.

[Suetonius]

Suetonius reminds me of another poster. I am not saying who. Nothing to be concerned about and motives are genuine.

 

Magda the terms and conditions you have together with Link's claim to TS they have absolute assignment prove they are the creditor. The only way they can attempt a way out is to rely on the contract between them and FNB having duties under normal contract law rather than the CCA terms & conditions. The latter possibility needs to be covered in your request by asking TS to deem the contract between Link & FNB flawed and therefore requires re-assignment to FNB.

 

Isn't there another thread where someone had a letter from TS saying that a DCA is classed as the creditor and as I remember it was scanned into the post...

[Suetonius]

Paulinus Seutonous...I hope that your motive is honourable?

 

AC

 

Oh course my motives are honourable. Isn't evident from the content of my post ?

 

Everyone has to start with their first post sometime, thanks for the warm welcome

[MAGDA]

Suetonius reminds me of another poster. I am not saying who. Nothing to be concerned about and motives are genuine.

 

Magda the terms and conditions you have together with Link's claim to TS they have absolute assignment prove they are the creditor. The only way they can attempt a way out is to rely on the contract between them and FNB having duties under normal contract law rather than the CCA terms & conditions. The latter possibility needs to be covered in your request by asking TS to deem the contract between Link & FNB flawed and therefore requires re-assignment to FNB.

 

Hi, Activ, thanks for all your help in relation to Link, and for your response above. I have quite a few points to consider now (including those raised by Suetonius) when replying to TS and it is all much appreciated. Magda

[Suetonius]

Hi, Activ, thanks for all your help in relation to Link, and for your response above. I have quite a few points to consider now (including those raised by Suetonius) when replying to TS and it is all much appreciated. Magda

 

One last bit of advice

 

Don't let the barstewards get you down

[MAGDA]

Oh course my motives are honourable. Isn't evident from the content of my post ?

 

Everyone has to start with their first post sometime, thanks for the warm welcome

 

I am sure your motives are honourable, as I don't think you would have posted the comments you did, if they were not. Welcome to the forum as I for one did welcome your help.

 

Magda

[make them aktiv runners]

Isn't there another thread where someone had a letter from TS saying that a DCA is classed as the creditor and as I remember it was scanned into the post...

 

I assume you did not read post 265 on that thread?

[Suetonius]

Was it this thread or another one ? I have been reading so much the last week or so

[Suetonius]

I am sure your motives are honourable, as I don't think you would have posted the comments you did, if they were not. Welcome to the forum as I for one did welcome your help.

 

Magda

 

Thank you

[make them aktiv runners]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-1697250.html

[Suetonius]

cheers

[make them aktiv runners]

Not sure if the lost server means the thread are displaying who is online inaccurately. Suetonius you are showing as viewing now, did you read that thread?