Ok heres a basic run down of my case. I bought a corsa bakkie in Nov 2011 (Wesbank Finance). Nov 2012 I broke my ankle and couldnt work (construction) for about 3 months effectively. This seriously compromised my already precarious financial situation and the ball started rolling. Made a couple of smaller payments but then defaulted on car and credit cards. Tried to reason with Wesbank and ask for some short moratorium or small payments just to keep going until I could catch up....not interested! Their only offer was way more than I could afford then. Asked for meetings, never happened but they continued with threats and smss and phone calls from 7.30am to 8.30pm every day for months. I realized that because of their stance even if I did make some small payments it would not stop their legal action so I stopped even trying to pay and started sending 1st, 2nd and third letters from this site. Got the usual BS answers and evasive mumblings re securitization issues. Finally got Summons (sent to wrong post office etc etc) and responded that I would defend in court set down for 9th Jan 2014. Pitched with Alan Madden to present myself. Alan tried FMOL route and judge refused to answer his questions re oath etc and had him removed just short of contempt of court. Neither of us stood at all and I then very politely stated that there was no disrespect but we were not putting ourselves under their jurisdiction but wished to be heard etc. She postponed to the 29th telling me to submit an opposing argument affidavit and to get legal council. Based on advice I got I submitted an affidavit stating that I could not afford legal council and because I was unfamiliar with court jargon etc I would present my argument orally on the 29th myself. We arrived and were heard at about 4.00pm after 6 power failures and half my argument delivered in the dark. Different judge this time who was highly pissed off that I hadnt submitted an argument in writing and that I never told the previous judge that I could not afford a lawyer. However he decided to listen to me. I explained that for the umpteenth time I was insisting on the original doc with both signatures and therefore binding both parties, That I had reason to believe that even if there was an agreement it had been securitized and therefore they had no locus ststandi. Opposing advocate was just in the process of admitting it had been securitized by citing my signature on 3rd page, point 15(2) that I agreed that they could cede the doc, when another power failure caused judge to postpone till Friday 31. We pitched again, were heard last at about 1.30 and this time I managed to speak much more firmly and insisted that there could be no hearing without the original doc due to Rules of Evidence, fakes, securitization arguments etc. Denied having signed the copy presented and reminded him that onus was on them to prove their allegation. I said even IF i had signed, the agreement only has one signature and the fact that they cannot produce the original doc (which should be simple), means that it has been securitized by their own admission 2 days before and therefore they have no claim anymore. I even read from Blacks Law Dictionary, the definition of Cession, which made it very clear that all title and deed passed to the new owner. I could see that he was not even remotely interested or considering what I was saying and when Id finished he proceeded to grant summary judgement in their favor. Realizing that all was lost anyway I asked him if I could speak, he boredly agreed and I explained (truthfully) that that vehicle was my only means of generating income as Im in construction and I have two kids to get to and from school etc and my other obligation. The vehicle is a tool of my trade and without it I would be financially crippled. Not interested!!! At that point I asked if Alan could say something and judge said he could say whatever he wants. Alan got up and explained as a last resort FMOL, Maritime law, how maoney is made out of thin air and that if Applicant gave us an invoice we would set off according to Bill-Exchange Act in same way it was created. Judge listened at first and told us we were weklcome to try it. CONCLUSION: Judge only lent weight to the fact that I had been paying and therefore acknowledged that there was an agreement in place. (he never said that though) and he COMPLETELY ignored every other point about originals, signature and specifically Securitization. I always knew that hed be in a tight spot because of my circumstances on one hand and delivering a fatal blow to the banks on the other. Bottom line the way I see it is that the law is only a grey guideline for the judge and he will rule within that grey making sure to not do anything potentially disastrous for the bank. Was I giving him the run around and citing techicalities? Yes! to test these arguments in a real life situation. Were they valid arguments? Absolutely...especially the fact that by their own actions, the bank had given up all right of claim...that has to count for something! Judge couldnt have cared less and totally dismissed it. Moral of the story: All of these cowboy stock answers and arguments dont work in court so we need a far more strategic approach and we really need to refine out approach. Having said that, I cannot thank all of you enough for your advice and support and especially Alan who is a warrior of note and sat through 3 days of court with me and who only recently even met me. Thank you Al!!! I will post all docs for what it worth and Alan had sound bites of everything. The aim was always FIRST to test this stuff in court and learn from it and SECOND to retain the car. If my prime objective was to keep the car I would have gone a much more humble- cap- in- hand, grovelling sheep route but somehow that just doesnt appeal to me. We are now the wolves and like wiley coyote we will find the soft underbelly of these scum and destroy their system. Maybe the trick is to stay out of the courts to start with. Within them you are screwed. All thoughts and input much appreciated so we can all learn. Sorry for the long spiel and I know its a Mickey Mouse case but we can still learn and adapt from it.. Thanks Team!!!!!!
Posted on: Sat, 01 Feb 2014 10:15:00 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015