Voluntary termination problem need help fast

lilolilly200

I issued my finance company with a voluntary termination notice a few weeks ago. I have met all the terms on the agreement and I am not currently in any arrears. They acknowledged my request but then came out with some excuse that I needed to pay some outstanding collection charges before they would proceed any further. i replied to them stating that any outstanding collection charges were not subject to the terms of a VT in the agreement and told them basically to get on with it.

Received another letter from them today now saying that they issued a notice of repossion nearly 12 months ago as the account was in arreas then but was brought up to date since. They went on to say that as an act of good will on their behalf they didnn't seek possesion and allowed us to continue making payments on the car untill the agreement came to an end and now they have sent us a form to agree to "voluntary surrender" of the vehicle instead. I wasn't born yesterday and I am not aggreening to that but can they now stop us from VTing the car? There is nothing in the agrement which states anything about this being terms of a VT nor did we receive any letters saying anything about any act of good will. The original repossesion notice was sent in April 2009. Nothing was ever done about this as paymenst were brought up to date and nothing more as heard.

Can anyone advise? Basically we still want to VT but the finance co don't.

~Brock~

Either party can terminate an agreement, and when one party has done so, the other party cannot.

It looks like they are claiming that they have terminated the agreement last year, thus preventing you from doing it now. Did you receive a termination notice, which should have been preceded by a default notice?

If not then it looks like they are trying it on.

lilolilly200

Yes I received a default notice and a notice seeking possesion back in April 2009. (11 months ago)When the payments were brought up to date nothing more was heard or said and the agreement continued as normal and has done ever since. Surely if they carrid on accepting our monthly payments then they must have still be accepting them under the terms of the current agreement.

They accepted my termination the other week until I told them that the collection fees they were demanding first were not part if the terms of voluntay termination. They were obviously trying it on then. Just wondered if this latest attempt is another way of getting out of it?

~Brock~

To be honest, the notice seeking possession you received last year, assuming it was a follow up to the default notice, could well have been their notice that the account was terminated.

The fact that they have allowed you to keep making payments (well they would, wouldnt they!?) is not particularly relevant, the fact remains that if they have already issued a default notice and the date for remedy on that notice has passed, then you are potentially liable for the full balance less the sale proceeds of the vehicle. If you brought the account up to date within the timescales of the default notice then this would not be relevant - this is the most important point to consider.

There is case law that backs up this view - First Response Finance v Donnelly [2006] - I can't find a direct link to the case itself but if you google it you should get the idea.

lilolilly200

The notice of termination was given on the 26th April 2009 nearly 11 months ago and the account as brought up to date and the arrears were paid in the timescale allowed.

Their recent letter states that they decided at the time to let us carry on paying for the car instead of them seeking repposesion and this was an act of good will on their behalf, This is the first instance we have heard of this. Nothing was mentioned about this so call act of good will at the time. The agreement carried on as normal and has done for the past 11 months.

lilolilly200

Just been going through of some of the more recent letters I have had from them as well.
We fell into arrears again early this year as my husband as off work sick. We received two more default notices as well one in January (again this was settled in the timescale allowed) and the notice also contained the paragraph that we have the right to terminate etc.

However another default notice was issued in the February again we settled in time but this time the paragraph was not on the default notice about our right to terminate. Is this legal? Could it be because they knew we had by then reached the magic figure of paying 'half the total amount repayable?" Also by issuing further default notices surely this confirms that they have not ended the agreement back in April 2009.

I am hoping to compose a letter back to them in the next day or so but want to get all of my facts right first.

lilolilly200

Also had an account statement in October 2009 which includes all of my payments, rescheduling fees added in June 2009 all of which are after the previously mentioned notice of termination from them in April 2009. Surely this is enough evidence to prove that they have not terminated the agreement?????

Sorry getting a bit anxious and just wanted to post up as much info as possible.

standupguy

It looks like although a termination letter was sent, you brought the account up to date and the company did not act upon the termination but let you continue to make the payments.

In other words the account was never terminated and remained a live account on their system.

This means if you default again, as you did, then they they have to start the process all over again by sending a new default notice - this they did but you brought the account up to date before expiry of the default notice - so no issues there and the account remains live.

They are now trying it on to help mitigate their potential losses if you vt.

Don't fall for it.

Write to them stating that you wrote to them on xxx date terminating your agreement and the date of termination will be xxxx? (the date they received your letter)

You are liable for any outstanding payments or arrears up to the termination date and providing you have paid half the hp price and the car is in a reasonable condition then you have nothing further to pay.

What they are saying is nonsense - the agreement was never terminated and remained live.

Tell them you are prepared to take this matter to the Financial Ombudsman service if they do not deal with this vt in the correct manner

nomoneytoday

AFAIK you can't VT if the account is in arrears.
Whether previous arrears "count" should be answered by a solicitor or other expert, rather than on an internet forum.

standupguy

nomoneytoday wrote: »

AFAIK you can't VT if the account is in arrears.
Whether previous arrears "count" should be answered by a solicitor or other expert, rather than on an internet forum.

You can vt if an account is in arrears - all that happens is the arrears amount becomes an outstanding liability which the finance company can recover afterwards.

ps I think i would come under the "other expert" heading.

Forums can help a lot if posters can look at answers to their queries and distinguish between know-it-alls and those with an obvious more hands on knowledge of the subject

~Brock~

standupguy wrote: »

You can vt if an account is in arrears - all that happens is the arrears amount becomes an outstanding liability which the finance company can recover afterwards.

ps I think i would come under the "other expert" heading.

Forums can help a lot if posters can look at answers to their queries and distinguish between know-it-alls and those with an obvious more hands on knowledge of the subject

Amen to that.:beer: