We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
"Unenforcable" Credit Agreements - let's get it out in the open
Options
Comments
-
blind-as-a-bat wrote: »Yes hopefully, there is still the other problem though, which you have not addressed, and that is the cost of taking legal action, it can take hundreds of pounds just to get to the first hearing.
Ok you may be able to get some, if not all fees waived if your on a low income, and if you win, you should be able to get your fees back, but you still need the money upfront (if you can not get them waived).
And there is always the risk if you lose, you then may have to pay the other sides costs, and even if you win, if the judge deems you did anything wrong he may not allow you an order for costs anyway, so its a bit of a minefield.
That alone means many just do not have the luxary of taking the matter to court
There is always the possibilaty of legal aid etc, but im sure you see my point.
believeing in the justice system, is one thing, but even if you do, being able to afford to use it can be another
Such is our great legal system:rolleyes:
This has always been my point. How do most people secure justice in these cases?
The claims mamagement service in the main has gone down the route of charging fees up front but it can be done without charging and allow mass market claims for the general public at large at no cost and no financial risk.
Such a service is limited to what it can take on because of legal limits and particality but it can and is now being achieved.I am a former Broker, former IFA and former compliance officer, for my sins.
However, I have since seen the light.0 -
blind-as-a-bat wrote: »It depends what you want to achieve peter, if you dont care about your CRA, you can do it all yourself quite easily IF nothing with a signeture can be produced.
If a document with a signeture is produced, but does not contain prescribed terms, i can fight that in court myself, and by the letter off legaslation i would win
But having already tried that once, and got a judge who totaly ignored the CCA act (we still won, but not due to anything to do with the CCA), i dont see, when faced with the same arrogance any 'claim company' can do any better, without risking a lot of money in the apeals proscess, on top of what has already been lost in defending, or bringing the first action.
Im not convinced any such 'claim company' can offer such a service, and sirvive financialy, unless they just cherry pick the cases that anyone can do themselves.
I already know even solicitors fair no better when faced with a judge who ignores the legaslation
Whether a claims company can survive financially is not the debate but I assure you that it is more than possible to survive while offering a free service.
I agree that you cannot take on all cases. Legal limitations and criteria make that impossible
As for the legal arguments, CCA breaches are very difficult to win on their own and will get more and more difficult. You need to have other robust issues with them to win the case. There needs to be issues that the judge has no discression on.I am a former Broker, former IFA and former compliance officer, for my sins.
However, I have since seen the light.0 -
blind-as-a-bat wrote: »It depends what you want to achieve peter, if you dont care about your CRA, you can do it all yourself quite easily IF nothing with a signeture can be produced.
If a document with a signeture is produced, but does not contain prescribed terms, i can fight that in court myself, and by the letter off legaslation i would win
But having already tried that once, and got a judge who totaly ignored the CCA act (we still won, but not due to anything to do with the CCA), i dont see, when faced with the same arrogance any 'claim company' can do any better, without risking a lot of money in the apeals proscess, on top of what has already been lost in defending, or bringing the first action.
Im not convinced any such 'claim company' can offer such a service, and sirvive financialy, unless they just cherry pick the cases that anyone can do themselves, and possibly even get a counter claim which they can keep themselves, instead of the claim company taking it.
I already know even solicitors fair no better when faced with a judge who ignores the legaslation
PS I agree that claims companies attempting to negotiate with the lender themselves will have no more effect than the individual doing it themselves.
However, a specialist lawyer armed with the evidence will win every time.I am a former Broker, former IFA and former compliance officer, for my sins.
However, I have since seen the light.0 -
blind-as-a-bat wrote: »Not every time, making a statement like that is a bit arogant.
You have not heard of the case in liverpool then, where no valid CCA was produced at all , but the judge still ruled in favour of the claiment:rolleyes:
I have heard of the case. If you read carefully, what I did say was that CCA breaches would get harder to win on their own. I said that because of the case you quoted and other information I have.
The CCA issues should be used in conjunction with other more robust heads of claim.
Arrogance? I was not meaning to be arrogant.I am a former Broker, former IFA and former compliance officer, for my sins.
However, I have since seen the light.0 -
blind-as-a-bat wrote: »Your a good salesman peter, i will give you that, but i did not say a claim company could not survive, i said it only could by taking the cases that are allmost a dead cert to win]
Thats an odd statement, the judge is not supposed to have discresion on acts of parliment, even more so when that act has been supported in the court of appeal and the house of lords.
So if that means nothing to some district judges, nothing will.
You did actually state quite clearly that you had doubts that a claims company could survive financial if they did not charge. That is why I replied.
I agree that such a company would be very careful in what it chose to run as a case.
As for judges using discression, the new CCA legislation gives them carte blanche to use their discression. I have no doubt that now they have it they will apply it whenver they can. It is no surprise surely that judges ignore the legislation, they have been doing it for decades with repossessions.I am a former Broker, former IFA and former compliance officer, for my sins.
However, I have since seen the light.0 -
I spoke to National Debt line tonight and they were lovely, but very sceptical about this whole matter.
They said loads of people are checking their CCA's and they thought if it's a prime lender, they are unlikely to have got their contracts wrong- I disagree personally, anyone else got a view?
Thanks!!!
LBM Jan 09- debts- sky high- but I am proud to be dealing with them:Tnow debt free and determined to maintain good spending habits and build savings0 -
cheesedoffwithdebt wrote: »They said loads of people are checking their CCA's and they thought if it's a prime lender, they are unlikely to have got their contracts wrong- I disagree personally, anyone else got a view?
I can understand their scepticism - the boom in cca requests, especially those initiated by the fee-charging 'debt write off [STRIKE]con merchants[/STRIKE] sorry companies will certainly make creditors more careful over the compliance of agreements.
However, it is the right of any debtor to request their credit agreement, at any time, and experience shows that MBNA are not particularily well known for their respect of, or compliance with, UK legislation.I am NOT, nor do I profess to be, a Qualified Debt Adviser. I have made MANY mistakes and have OFTEN been the unwitting victim of the the shamefull tactics of the Financial Industry.
If any of my experiences, or the knowledge that I have gained from those experiences, can help anyone who finds themselves in similar circumstances, then my experiences have not been in vain.
HMRC Bankruptcy Statistic - 26th October 2006 - 23rd April 2007 BCSC Member No. 7
DFW Nerd # 166 PROUD TO BE DEALING WITH MY DEBTS0 -
Interesting what you say about MBNA. I have two requests for them for a family member and they have not responded to my original request or the 12+2 letter. Will have to see what happens. Probably wouldn't have gone down this route if they didn't raise the interest rates to 34.9%. It's become unaffordable. Our view is that if they don't have the CCA then how do we know they have rights to raise their rates whenever they like?0
-
Hi there
I'd thought i'd post here ive posted elsewhere
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1498201
i had no idea regarding this then when someone asked (RAS) re the actual document i received i uploaded it and then found this after looking into it.
as you can see on that post i have my actual agrement signed in pre 2000 and it dosent match any of the points needed as mentioned at the start, does this mean this debt is unenforcable and if it is what would be my responce to the debt collecters?
Many Thanks
Marc0 -
Something along these linesRe: my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974
Thank you for your letter dated <date>.
It would seem that you are of the belief that you have discharged your obligations under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 in particular section 78(1).
You have provided me a copy of an application form, not a correctly executed credit agreement.
Firstly, to comply with section 61 of the consumer credit act 1974 which by the way refers to the signing of an agreement (Not an application), a document must conform to regulations made under the provisions of section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 otherwise it cannot be properly executed
Now then, these regulations I refer to are the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553). These regulations set out the form and content of agreements. For an agreement to be compliant with the regulations it MUST embody within the agreement, the prescribed terms laid out in the SI1983/1553. Without the prescribed terms the agreement does not conform to section 60(1) 1974 and therefore cannot be properly executed as described in section 61(1) CCA 1974.
For your information in case you are unsure. The prescribed terms referred to are contained in schedule 6 column 2 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and are: -- A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or that there is no credit limit;Now nowhere on the application form that you supplied is there any reference to these terms.
- A term stating the rate of any interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement and;
- A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following--
(a)Number of repayments;
(b)Amount of repayments;
(c)Frequency and timing of repayments;
(d)Dates of repayments;
(e)The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable.
I wish to remind you that the absence of these terms will render a document unenforceable in court and I also wish to point out that these terms MUST be contained within the agreement and NOT in a separate document headed terms and conditions or words to that effect
Therefore, you have failed to supply an enforceable document, which is correctly executed; as to be so it must conform to the Regulations under s60 CCA1974.
I am of the opinion that a court is precluded from enforcing this agreement by s127 (3) CCA1974 as it is improperly executed under s61 CCA 1974.
The consequences of improper execution are set out in section 65 CCA 1974 and s65 sets out that only a court can enforce an improperly executed agreement subject to certain qualifications, one of those is that the document is signed and contains all the prescribed terms.
Now since this document does not contain all the prescribed terms s127 (3) CCA 1974 strictly prevents the court from enforcing this agreement.
If you cannot supply me with a document, which complies with the Consumer Credit Act 1974, and ALL of the Regulations made under the Act, I shall be forced to make a complaint to Trading Standards and I will also draw this to the attention of the Office of Fair Trading and the Financial Ombudsman.
I respectfully request you review this matter in light of my comments above and I request that you supply me the required information or alternatively confirm the account with yourselves is closed.
I respectfully request a reply within 14 days of the date of this letter.
Yours SincerelyFree/impartial debt advice: National Debtline | StepChange Debt Charity | Find your local CAB
IVA & fee charging DMP companies: Profits from misery, motivated ONLY by greed0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.6K Spending & Discounts
- 244K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards