UK DD clawbacks and Simon Goldberg

[NYGman]

Let's say Tuco got married to a nice rich woman. She decides to take over paying his credit card bills. Does Tuco have to notify the bank, he is no longer paying and his new wife is taking over? Of course not. The Bank doesn't care who pays them the money, it makes no difference to them. The obligation to pay is what is binding, and you can transfer the payor to someone else, although your obligation will remain, unless of course the bank agrees to an assignment. However, even without agreeing to the assignment, the bank will still happily take the payment regardless of who is paying. This is true in reverse. The bank has an asset, a debt. You have agreed to repay, they just want you to pay it to someone else. You obligation (and theirs) have not changed, just who is receiving the cash.

[Tuco]

Sadly for Tuco ten-year-olds don't decide court cases.

Don't feel too sorry for me sonny. I had a total of around £30k credit, paid back around £5k, the rest was written off.

Pity they didn't have you acting for them eh? You know best.

[Bones]

There there Tuco, everything is ok, the grown ups will stop asking you to prove your claims and opinions

[Henti]

Assignment of rights
36. After section 82 (variation of agreements), insert—
“Assignment of rights

82A.—(1) Where rights of a creditor under a regulated consumer credit agreement are assigned to a third party, the assignee must arrange for notice of the assignment to be given to the debtor—
(a)as soon as reasonably possible, or

(b)if, after the assignment, the arrangements for servicing the credit under the agreement do not change as far as the debtor is concerned, on or before the first occasion that they do.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010 ... on/36/made

[longdog]

This tread is getting like a YouTube comments section.

"It has been proven that <insert 'natural' remedy of choice here> cures cancer better than chemo"

"OK... Lets see the proof"

"I DON'T HAVE TO PROVE ANYTHING TO A PAID SHILL LIKE YOU!!!!!"

Or in Tuco-speak.

"I can prove it"

"Go on then"

"I don't have to prove it"

"...Because you can't"

"I AM THE PROOF!!!!"

[Tuco]

By the same token, has anybody proven me wrong?

Of course I can cite case law if I want to. I don't see the need to do so given it will make no difference anyway. Nobody is going to go "fair play Tuco, you were right" are they?

[Henti]

Let's say Tuco got married to a nice rich woman. She decides to take over paying his credit card bills. Does Tuco have to notify the bank, he is no longer paying and his new wife is taking over? Of course not. The Bank doesn't care who pays them the money, it makes no difference to them. The obligation to pay is what is binding, and you can transfer the payor to someone else, although your obligation will remain, unless of course the bank agrees to an assignment. However, even without agreeing to the assignment, the bank will still happily take the payment regardless of who is paying. This is true in reverse. The bank has an asset, a debt. You have agreed to repay, they just want you to pay it to someone else. You obligation (and theirs) have not changed, just who is receiving the cash.

Yes that's about it although if the bank and the debtor agreed it would probably be a novation.

[Bones]

"I AM THE PROOF!!!!"

[Bones]

Of course I can cite case law if I want to. I don't see the need to do so given it will make no difference anyway. Nobody is going to go "fair play Tuco, you were right" are they?

Come on Tuco put up or shut up

[rumpelstilzchen]

By the same token, has anybody proven me wrong?

We don't need to. No one has to do anything. It is your claim and it is up to you to prove your claim. Reversing the burden of proof is an argument from ignorance, a logical fallacy.

[Tuco]

By the same token, has anybody proven me wrong?

We don't need to. No one has to do anything. It is your claim and it is up to you to prove your claim. Reversing the burden of proof is an argument from ignorance, a logical fallacy.

What exactly is my claim?

I stated banks sell agreements for profit, you stated "so what"?

[Bones]

Still ducking and deflecting - just post the cases you claim support your claims - you are just getting boring now

[Henti]

By the same token, has anybody proven me wrong?

Of course I can cite case law if I want to. I don't see the need to do so given it will make no difference anyway. Nobody is going to go "fair play Tuco, you were right" are they?

Sorry Tuco but everyone has
Proven you wrong"

The problem with you FMoTL guys is that you think you can interpret legal process in any way that suits you.

You really need to take a few steps back and examine your grasp of a few fundamental principles.

[Bones]

Thanks for the PM Tuco, please feel free to post the 10 cases that you refer too

You really don't get it do you?

I couldn't give a fuck about you people. Do you think it bothers me that you all gang up like little kids?

I'm currently studying contract law for exams in January. I could cite you 10 cases off the top of my head.

You mistakeingly think I crave your acceptance or approval

You're just a bitter & twisted silly cow who can't get over the fact that I outed you on BHF.

I love how you stalk me, never able to quite fulfil your promises to ignore me.

Obviously you do crave acceptance and approval, I am guessing you didn't get enough attention as a child

[Tuco]

Still ducking and deflecting - just post the cases you claim support your claims - you are just getting boring now

Ladies before gentlemen Bones-You first.

Explain to us how all these originals just happen to get mislaid and can never be produced whilst the copies are guarded like they are gold in Fort Knox.

[Bones]

Still ducking and deflecting - just post the cases you claim support your claims - you are just getting boring now

Ladies before gentlemen Bones-You first.

Explain to us how all these originals just happen to get mislaid and can never be produced whilst the copies are guarded like they are gold in Fort Knox.

Still ducking and deflecting - just post the cases you claim support your claims - you are just getting boring now

[Bones]

I will make it easier for you, instead of the 10 cases you claim, just post one

[Tuco]

Still ducking and deflecting - just post the cases you claim support your claims - you are just getting boring now

Ladies before gentlemen Bones-You first.

Explain to us how all these originals just happen to get mislaid and can never be produced whilst the copies are guarded like they are gold in Fort Knox.

Still ducking and deflecting - just post the cases you claim support your claims - you are just getting boring now

Seriously love-Do you really need case law to show you that terms are breached if someone promises to safeguard your data and then fails to do so?

Keep on keeping on.

[Henti]

Thanks for the PM Tuco, please feel free to post the 10 cases that you refer too

You really don't get it do you?

I couldn't give a fuck about you people. Do you think it bothers me that you all gang up like little kids?

I'm currently studying contract law for exams in January. I could cite you 10 cases off the top of my head.

You mistakeingly think I crave your acceptance or approval

You're just a bitter & twisted silly cow who can't get over the fact that I outed you on BHF.

I love how you stalk me, never able to quite fulfil your promises to ignore me.

Obviously you do crave acceptance and approval, I am guessing you didn't get enough attention as a child

Oh eck. Your in trouble now Bones, he is studying contract law.

What is he supposed to be proving anyway ? That it is ilegal to sell agreements .

It is a multi trillion pound industry for gods sake.

[Bones]

Zzzzzzzz boring

Tuco if you can't list the 10 cases you said you could name off the top of your head, it is ok - No one thought you could anyway