Unfair Credit Agreements

petermb_2

dont shoot the messenger mate. Unenforceable agreements is not my bag but just reporting what i heard three district judges had said.

chez000

petermb wrote: »

dont shoot the messenger mate. Unenforceable agreements is not my bag but just reporting what i heard three district judges had said.

Not my intention to 'have a go' at you, just wanted to extend on what you had said

Credit-Crunched

petermb wrote: »

dont shoot the messenger mate. Unenforceable agreements is not my bag but just reporting what i heard three district judges had said.

I thought this was your bag? You seem to dicate to everyone else (sorry bleaters) that you are the oracle of uneforceable agreements?

Quick question do you offer a service relating to this at all?

Swans1912

petermb wrote: »

On the other hand if the lender cannot provide a copy of the executed agreement there is no loan to enforce in the eyes of the courts.

Agreed however if the person is paying the lender a monthly fixed amount is that not evidence of a credit agreement?

chez000

iKennett wrote: »

Agreed however if the person is paying the lender a monthly fixed amount is that not evidence of a credit agreement?

I think that in those circumstances it would be fair to presume that there is an agreement, if the loan was taken out after April 2007 then in these circumstances an abscence of the actual paperwork would not neccessairly make the agreemnt unenforcable.

However for agreemnts that started before April 2007 all that is neccessary for the agreemnt to be unenforcable is for the signed agreements to be missing.

lclclclc

"However for agreemnts that started before April 2007 all that is neccessary for the agreemnt to be unenforcable is for the signed agreements to be missing." - that is exactly my situation, mine was taken out in Feb 06. Where have you seen that information ? Natwest confirm that they are unable to take me court to recover payments, should that happen.. considering at the moment, using the fact that the agreement is absent, to negotiate a full and final settlement, that takes in the difference paid, original amount..

petermb_2

Credit-Crunched wrote: »

I thought this was your bag? You seem to dicate to everyone else (sorry bleaters) that you are the oracle of uneforceable agreements?

Quick question do you offer a service relating to this at all?

We all have our specialities. I dont dictate anything, I just try to help those seeking help. There seem to be those that are only here to snipe and gripe.

As for the legal stuff, I know enough to get me by and what stuff i dont know I have contacts who do.

petermb_2

lclclclc wrote: »

"However for agreemnts that started before April 2007 all that is neccessary for the agreemnt to be unenforcable is for the signed agreements to be missing." - that is exactly my situation, mine was taken out in Feb 06. Where have you seen that information ? Natwest confirm that they are unable to take me court to recover payments, should that happen.. considering at the moment, using the fact that the agreement is absent, to negotiate a full and final settlement, that takes in the difference paid, original amount..

As i said before, no agreement no loan. Nat West appear to be worst offenders for this so far.

chez000

lclclclc wrote: »

"However for agreemnts that started before April 2007 all that is neccessary for the agreemnt to be unenforcable is for the signed agreements to be missing." - that is exactly my situation, mine was taken out in Feb 06. Where have you seen that information ? Natwest confirm that they are unable to take me court to recover payments, should that happen.. considering at the moment, using the fact that the agreement is absent, to negotiate a full and final settlement, that takes in the difference paid, original amount..

Your loan as it was taken out in 2006 (presuming its a standard personal loan i.e. not secured, not a mortagage, not HP, not for business etc) is regulated by the 1974 consumer credit act under this act if there is no signed agreement then the debt is not enforcable.

If you google "consumer credit act 1974" that should bring the act up, if you want to check.
A friendly warning legislation is never an easy read.

Any adviser from the likes of CAB, CCCS, national debtline will verify the above for you.

chez000

petermb wrote: »

As i said before, no agreement no loan. Nat West appear to be worst offenders for this so far.

In my opinion the worst offenders are the catalogue companies.
If you have had a catalogue then it is highly likley that you have never even been asked to sign an agreement.

I would imagine that the catalogue companies were fairly influential in the changes that were included in the 2006 act as now it is not neccessary for them to get signed agreements for agreements started after April 2007.

The cataolgue companies will have lost out on thousands through not proparly executing agreements