Assignments, what you need to know!

by Waffle Wed Nov 29, 2017 5:31 pm

Edited

by 1saberwow Wed Nov 29, 2017 7:34 pm

Would this be correct. We need to send the OC a Section 10 and a Section 11 that will prevent the OC from passing to a DCA any or all DATA the OC has on US? This was mentioned in an earlier thread about preventing the OC from giving any DATA to a DCA once they had purchased our Account from the OC.

by Tiggy Wed Nov 29, 2017 8:16 pm

I think you're misinterpreting the Rights of Third Party Act 1999, you can only use that legislation IF it's been specifically written into a contract that a 'named' third party has rights under the specific contract.

So if it was written into the original agreement that a specifically name third party has a right, then under the act they would have rights.

If it's not specifically written into the terms of agreement then they can't invoke the rights of a third party under the Rights of a Third Party Act.

If, however, they specifically insert a clause into a contract (which is what the Halifax / Sainsbury's Bank did during 2000 - 2008) which specifically denies any party a right under the Rights of Third Party Act 1999, and it's then assigned you could attempt to state a breach of contract has occurred and that you only signed the agreement because you believed a third party wouldn't be assigned rights.

by Waffle Wed Nov 29, 2017 8:16 pm

Yes that is correct 1berwow, but only after a full legal assignment not after an equitable assignment. I would call the Information Commissioners Office to seek advice to make sure you can fully compel them to do this because sometimes they ignore or don't comply. If you have the consequences and any other information to back it up it will help you going forwards..

I plan on calling them later this week to find out more info, don't rely/wait on me though.

by Waffle Wed Nov 29, 2017 8:40 pm

Edited

by Tiggy Wed Nov 29, 2017 9:28 pm

I think you need to read the legislation yourself, you have to be named in the original contract to have rights under that particular piece of legislation.

1 Right of third party to enforce contractual term.

(1)Subject to the provisions of this Act, a person who is not a party to a contract (a “third party”) may in his own right enforce a term of the contract if—

(a)the contract expressly provides that he may, or

(b)subject to subsection (2), the term purports to confer a benefit on him.

(2)Subsection (1)(b) does not apply if on a proper construction of the contract it appears that the parties did not intend the term to be enforceable by the third party.

(3)The third party must be expressly identified in the contract by name, as a member of a class or as answering a particular description but need not be in existence when the contract is entered into.

(4)This section does not confer a right on a third party to enforce a term of a contract otherwise than subject to and in accordance with any other relevant terms of the contract.

(5)For the purpose of exercising his right to enforce a term of the contract, there shall be available to the third party any remedy that would have been available to him in an action for breach of contract if he had been a party to the contract (and the rules relating to damages, injunctions, specific performance and other relief shall apply accordingly).

(6)Where a term of a contract excludes or limits liability in relation to any matter references in this Act to the third party enforcing the term shall be construed as references to his availing himself of the exclusion or limitation.

(7)In this Act, in relation to a term of a contract which is enforceable by a third party—

“the promisor” means the party to the contract against whom the term is enforceable by the third party, and
“the promisee” means the party to the contract by whom the term is enforceable against the promisor.

by Waffle Wed Nov 29, 2017 9:55 pm

Edited

by Waffle Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:05 pm

Edited

by **Lopsum** Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:13 pm

obviously we cant all get our hands on this book so you will have to do your best with criticism waffle ! Tiggy isnt purposefully trying to confuse the thread i do believe.

by Waffle Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:19 pm

Yes I know Tiggy isn't but we could have approached it better, its solid information that has been posted for everyones benefit and I am happy to help and answer questions.... It would be really helpful for the other members if this thread that is in the moving forwards section was unconfused..... if not then its only going to be a bad thread, that wasn't its purpose.

by Guest Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:26 pm

Hi

.......might i suggest a section devoted to 'asides'? Just a thought.....

Waffle - nice to see you back even if your just passing through. Thanks for the info drop. i suspect it may take me a while to understand though.....

Don't forget to let us know when your next vid's up - can't seem to rely on YT for notifications anymore.

Cheers!

by Tiggy Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:33 pm

Waffle, I understand it perfectly and people should be allowed to make up their own minds.

This is the bit I disagree with, you said this at the beginning of your post:

"That debt security .... is assignable under the Contracts (rights of third parties) Act 1999"

That doesn't make any sense, why would they use the Rights of Third Party Act 1999? The DCA would have to be named as a Third Party (as per the act) into an existing contract, so what would be the existing contract that a DCA would be named in as a third party?

Or they would just sell any alleged debt security under a standard contract, they're would be absolutely no need to use the Rights of Third Party Act at all or in fact assignment. All they need to do is sell the securities.

You also said that the 'debt' under the credit agreement is not assignable alone, but Section 136 Law of Property Act allows for a "debt" to be assigned.

by Waffle Wed Nov 29, 2017 11:05 pm

Edited

by Waffle Wed Nov 29, 2017 11:12 pm

Edited

by **Lopsum** Wed Nov 29, 2017 11:54 pm

ok going to take some time to gather thoughts, i see your point waffle, will see what we come up with. There was concern that new members might assume this section was rubber stamped so to speak.
Will tidy up your thread of my unnecessary posts and reply too, but i will leave the discussion going.

by **LionsShare** Thu Nov 30, 2017 6:45 am

Lopsum wrote:Tiggy isnt purposefully trying to confuse the thread i do believe.

I do concurr.

Tiggy actually challenged me in a utilities thread a short while back, it forced me to re-evaluate my thoughts & do more research. From that I could see Tiggy was correct.

Tiggy is wise regarding matters of "law" & has IMO done a lot of research which is evident for all our benefit on a array of subjects.

by Waffle Thu Nov 30, 2017 12:00 pm

Edited

by Sponsored content

Assignments, what you need to know!

Assignments, what you need to know!

Re: Assignments, what you need to know!

Re: Assignments, what you need to know!

Re: Assignments, what you need to know!

Re: Assignments, what you need to know!

Re: Assignments, what you need to know!

Re: Assignments, what you need to know!

Re: Assignments, what you need to know!

Re: Assignments, what you need to know!

Re: Assignments, what you need to know!

Re: Assignments, what you need to know!

Re: Assignments, what you need to know!

Re: Assignments, what you need to know!

Re: Assignments, what you need to know!

Re: Assignments, what you need to know!

Re: Assignments, what you need to know!

Re: Assignments, what you need to know!

Re: Assignments, what you need to know!