70k loan with no paperwork

foxwales

pippitypip wrote: »

Ok, so ignoring all the 'having a go' comments - I know enforceability as discussed in reference to most posts is about debts pre 2007, but how can they enforce a 2008 loan if they can't prove you took it out, or prove what agreements they made with you, i.e. length of loan term, interest rate, etc etc ???????

I'm no lawyer but I don't get how they can enforce this?

Plus as a separate issue, if there's no agreement, how do YOU know what payments to make and how long you'll be making them for and how much it's costing you? For your own protection you should have something in writing - that's the whole point of the agreement and provision of the loan. As a regulated body they MUST provide you with this, otherwise surely you should report them??????

Shocking! Plus I only wish someone would hand me 70k I'd wipe out my debts and be a "normal" person again.

pippitypip

The bank only has to prove that 70K has been deposited into the clients account to the courts and that the client has made repayments towards the borrowed balance; this then facilitates a contract being in place between two parties.

Also any correspondence that would have been passed between these two parties would have been logged by the bank, which obviously would document the existence of the borrowed amount.

The OP could try wasting thousands of pounds trying to get the loan nulled in court, but it would be very hard to disprove the banks right to enforce the loan.

pippitypip_2

Thanks fox and ILW, very interesting though.

I'm so shocked a big bank like Natwest would and, more to the point, could issue a loan without any paperwork. Wouldn't the FSA at least frown upon that or something?! There's no protection for the consumer, the OP..

Sorry OP that I'm not of any use, but it's an interesting thread

pippitypip

Dave101t

if they can prove they gave you the money, their lawyers can do the rest. shame on you for trying to weasel out of it, but good on you for trying to weasel out of it!

ILW

Dave101t wrote: »

shame on you for trying to weasel out of it, but good on you for trying to weasel out of it!

that bought a smile to my face.

foxwales

pippitypip wrote: »

Thanks fox and ILW, very interesting though.

I'm so shocked a big bank like Natwest would and, more to the point, could issue a loan without any paperwork. Wouldn't the FSA at least frown upon that or something?!

Sorry OP that I'm not of any use, but it's an interesting thread

pippitypip

There could be grounds for complaint for a failure in the banks ability to follow procedures and compliance with the FSA, but this would only apply to the agreement portion of the matter and not have any bearing on the actual enforceability of the amount borrowed.

ILW

Has any material loss been suffered due to the lack of paperwork?

dgl1001

K-Fit wrote: »

I knew someone would respond with a comment of that ilk! i am not shirking any responsibility, Clearly you are however the legality of any agreement can be brought into question at any time by all means question it, but you have stopped paying and are trying to resolve all responsibility. . cases like this in fact highlight the problem helping institutions to get their act together then make a complaint . so before you make sweeping comments It wasn't a sweeping comment, just my low opinion of you trying to avoid repayment of a low read my post and see where the bank has actually shirked their responsibilities in processing a 70 loan!

Btw what would they achieve by asking for immediate repayment? i take it you do not work in any managerial capacity....this comment is so fumyy on so many levels that im not even going to answer your comment

__________________________________

movingforward2010

i think it would be wrong not to pay it back, how about negotiating a lower interest rate?

K-Fit

Hi, for the record i am not trying to 'Weasle' out of it! put yourself in my shoes, and ask if you would question the loan in principle. That is all i am doing.

I actually applied for a mortgage, but the process was so shambolic i am hardly suprised i ended up with a small business loan (a fact only brought to my attention at the meeting with the bank)

My thoughts mainly are , how do i know what i agreed to if there is no agreement? shall i ask the bank for all documentation they have relating to the loan?

I raise this issue merely because during the meeting with the bank it was apparant that they didnt know who arranged the loan, what my business was, what the loan was for, what branch arranged it...absolutley nothing. it was farcical.

What is the bearing of the statement ' as your loan facility was drawn down on 3rd Jan 2008 it is not covered by the changes to the CCA which came into being on the 6th April 2008' does anyone know?

Thank you for all the responses...kind or otherwise! (im not a bad person, honest!)

K-Fit

dgl1001 wrote: »

__________________________________

ignore the relevent bits won't you....:T
Do i just bite the bullet and start paying again, even though there is no paperwork at all?