Non regulated secured loan of £30,000

Bigjazzy

Hi

Was wondering if someone can advise on the "correct legal" process a bank should follow when someone falls in arrears with this type of loan.

What process would the bank follow to obtain a CCJ/Decree on an unregulated secured loan.

Thanks

HappyMJ

It's secured they don't need to get a CCJ they'd just take action to repossess the secured property.

A CCJ allows a creditor to secure the debt against your property and then to take further action to secure repayment.

Thrugelmir

The legal part of the process will involve the application to the court to seek repossession of the property.

This will occur when other avenues have been exhausted.

WillyWonga

Non regulated means exactly that - it is not bound by the Consumer Credit Act because of the amount.

Banks will seek to force a repo through the courts, they don't want to enter into any payment plan if they are certain to get what they owe.

Please seek professional advice immediately eg CAB. Don't put it off till the next day.

Bigjazzy

Sorry, just checked the loan was an Unsecured, and should have been an Unregulated Loan.

I took out a NRAM Unsecured loan for £30,000 which was on the Regulated CCA paperwork. In 2009 I fell in arrears, they issued a default under the CCA and they went to court (Scottish Court) and got a ccj/decree. I have not paid a penny since they got the ccj/decree

In 2010 it transpired that loans over £25,000 were not indeed covered by the CCA and were infact unregulated loans. I have contacted the FOS and they have advised they would not deal with this case as it is a non regulated loan even though it is on regulated paperwork and went to court on the basis of this.

In the Writ to the courts they clearly state, the loan was a CCA loan and that I defaulted etc etc. They sent paperwork to my old address and as such I was unaware at the time they were taking me to court. As a result they got the ccj/decree because I did not defend the action.

I am looking to get the Decree overturned but wanted to know what would have been the correct procedure on this unregulated loan and is there a governing body I can got to for assistance. If the basis of the writ is on a CCA loan, then surely it is misrepresentation...

Someone please help me?

Bigjazzy

Sorry for the confusion, its an unsecured loan. They went to court separately to get repossession of the property, I vacated the property and they sold it at auction.

However, at the same time (different writ and case) they also went to court for the unsecured element.

Thrugelmir

Bigjazzy wrote: »

They sent paperwork to my old address and as such I was unaware at the time they were taking me to court.

No defence. You can't walk away so to speak.

Thrugelmir

Bigjazzy wrote: »

However, at the same time (different writ and case) they also went to court for the unsecured element.

Presumably as you had defaulted on this loan as well.

Gaz83

Bigjazzy wrote: »

Sorry, just checked the loan was an Unsecured, and should have been an Unregulated Loan.

I took out a NRAM Unsecured loan for £30,000 which was on the Regulated CCA paperwork. In 2009 I fell in arrears, they issued a default under the CCA and they went to court (Scottish Court) and got a ccj/decree. I have not paid a penny since they got the ccj/decree

In 2010 it transpired that loans over £25,000 were not indeed covered by the CCA and were infact unregulated loans. I have contacted the FOS and they have advised they would not deal with this case as it is a non regulated loan even though it is on regulated paperwork and went to court on the basis of this.

In the Writ to the courts they clearly state, the loan was a CCA loan and that I defaulted etc etc. They sent paperwork to my old address and as such I was unaware at the time they were taking me to court. As a result they got the ccj/decree because I did not defend the action.

I am looking to get the Decree overturned but wanted to know what would have been the correct procedure on this unregulated loan and is there a governing body I can got to for assistance. If the basis of the writ is on a CCA loan, then surely it is misrepresentation...

Someone please help me?

I assume, of course, that when you moved you notified them of your change of address?

Bigjazzy

yes because I was looking to set up a DMP and the company I used sent them a letter together with the letter of authority advising all correspondence through them as they looking to set up a DMP.

I have all the letters of correspondence to them

Hanky_Panky

Bigjazzy wrote: »

Sorry, just checked the loan was an Unsecured, and should have been an Unregulated Loan.

I took out a NRAM Unsecured loan for £30,000 which was on the Regulated CCA paperwork. In 2009 I fell in arrears, they issued a default under the CCA and they went to court (Scottish Court) and got a ccj/decree. I have not paid a penny since they got the ccj/decree

In 2010 it transpired that loans over £25,000 were not indeed covered by the CCA and were infact unregulated loans. I have contacted the FOS and they have advised they would not deal with this case as it is a non regulated loan even though it is on regulated paperwork and went to court on the basis of this.

In the Writ to the courts they clearly state, the loan was a CCA loan and that I defaulted etc etc. They sent paperwork to my old address and as such I was unaware at the time they were taking me to court. As a result they got the ccj/decree because I did not defend the action.

I am looking to get the Decree overturned but wanted to know what would have been the correct procedure on this unregulated loan and is there a governing body I can got to for assistance. If the basis of the writ is on a CCA loan, then surely it is misrepresentation...

Someone please help me?

For what purpose ? What do you expect to happen if you achieve this ?

Technically you may be correct however unless you are in a position to clear the debt in full then they potentially could just start the process again using the correct documentation and you'd be back where you started with a newer ccj - why ?

From reading the other very long thread on this it seems most people's expectation is that they can walk away scott free - this will definitely not happen.