John Pugh's Chambers
707 - 709
The Corn Exchange
Fenwick Street
L2 7RB

Specialists in consumer credit and commercial debt litigation

Home | Consumer Credit | Commercial | Personal Injury | Public Access | Cases | Contact | Diary | Links

John Pugh LLB (Hons)

Eileen Ashton JP LLB (Hons)
Practice Manager

Suzanne Thomas

Recent Reported Cases

Figurasin & Figurasin v Central Capital Limited [2014] EWCA Civ 505 On instructions from Quality Solicitors C Turner of Blackburn we successfully defended a judgment obtained in the Manchester County Court in a case of PPI financial mis-selling. The issue of principle was whether the court should, when considering whether communications were clear fair and not misleading for the purposes of the Insurance Conduct of Business Sourcebook (ICOB) at 2.2.3R view the communications as a whole or whether, if part of the communication was unclear, unfair and misleading (as in this case it was) was that alone enough to establish a breach of the regulations. The Court of Appeal held that our submission was correct. The correct approach was to then consider whether the breach was causative of any loss and in this case it was. The Court of Appeal rejected Central Capital Limited's proposal that if the written documentation was correct that negated any deficiency in the oral communication and upheld the award of 13,000 damages.

Consolidated Finance Limited v Collins & others [2013] EWCA Civ 475. On instructions from Chadwick Lawrence of Huddersfield we invited the Court of Appeal to look into the cold calling of persons who had been made bankrupt on a creditor's petition and been offered the annulment of the bankruptcy order by the advance of moneys on short-term loan. This involved substantial interest and fees becoming payable by the debtor. The total of the moneys advanced, interest, fees and costs incurred in connection with the annulment were secured on the debtor's home. If the debtor secured refinancing of the short-term indebtedness, it was repaid out of its proceeds. If not, which was the case for all the Defendants their house was to be sold to pay the bankruptcy debts, bankruptcy costs, Consolidated's fees, its sister company's fees, solicitors fees and the very high accrued interest. Consolidated had persuaded about 40 county courts that its agreement was unregulated and the court could not interfere. We persuaded the Court of Appeal that such an arrangement involved a refinancing. Therefore it was a debtor-creditor agreement, making it regulated and unenforceable without an order of the Court.

Brandon v American Express [2011] EWCA Civ 1187. On instructions from Trinity Law Solicitors of Huddersfield we obtained permission to bring a second appeal and persuaded the Court of Appeal that time taken for posting should be allowed for when considering the date of service of a default notice and that the  period specified between service of a default notice and the 'remedy by' date of 14 days was neither discretionary, nor was failure to provide it de minimis if payment had not been effected within the period concerned.  Further an attempt by AMEX to change its case between the first hearing and the first appeal without amendment should not have been permitted and the issues ought not to have been determined summarily either at first instance or on the first appeal. 

Evans v Cherry Tree Finance Limited [2008] EWCA Civ 331. In the Court of Appeal, on further instructions from Chadwick Lawrence we fended off a collateral attack on the decision above mentioned challenging the applicability of the Regulations to a business man making a commercial agreement outside his normal business. The Court of Appeal held that Mr Evans was a consumer under the UTCC Regulations 1998 and that they applied to his mortgage despite the premises having a commercial use.

Evans v Cherry Tree Finance [2007] EWCA 3527 (Ch) . On instructions from Chadwick Lawrence of Huddersfield we persuaded a Chancery Judge that the use of the Rule of 78 as a basis for a redemption charge in non status consumer lending over a substantial term contravened the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1998 in that it was opaque and unclear and failed to comply with the requirements that the terms should be in plain, intelligible language. and they required Mr Evans to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation for early termination.

Euro London Limited v Claessens [2006] EWCA Civ 385. On instructions from Berkson & Berkson of Birkenhead we persuaded the Court of Appeal in a second tier appeal to distinguish between primary payment obligation and a liquidated damages claim when a a payment obligation was contingent on an event which was also a breach (i.e. loss of rebate for early termination under a recruitment agency agreement due to non payment of original invoice).

Tel: 0151 236 5415        Fax: 0151 227 5468        Email:        DX 14182 Liverpool