Try not to wing it, this is a critical part of proceedings. Basically, your opportunity to re-inforce any arguements or markers you raised during pleading. Its important not to miss anything at this stage.

The witness statements are fairly straight forward.

I doubt the witness will be there in person, but cannot be certain on this, clearly.

The case law is the usual, in recent times. Basically, the only successes the banks have ever had.

The claimant can cite mailers and catalogues all they want, the law requires an agreement, and the agreement be compliant.

The Rankine case is complex but central to it is a litany of technical errors which the judge considered trivial, the attitude of the Rankines themselves - it is clear that the judge took an instant dislike to them, personally - and dubious witness statements. Also the Rankines sought an s142 declaration, only the creditor can seek this so they failed, oh, and inaccurate legal references (thy would probably have got away with this if they had approached the court with a more appropriate attitude).

The one thing that the courts cannot do is find in defiance of statute (athought they sometines try). s127(3) is very clear in its wording and its meaning. It is impossible to interpret in any other way than the way Bennion intended.

S