loans and signed credit agreements

System

inmypocketnottheirs wrote: »

Calm down dear!!

I did not write the CCA!

The real issue here is, if creditors adhered to the rules, then these loop holes could not be exploited. However, due to the slap dash mentality of various banks, finance and credit card companies and their determination to 'shaft' consumers, I can not say that I have any sympathy for them when they do not uphold their part of the bargain.

If they did their job properly, they would be able to provide the requested information, and there would not be the opportunity to avoid paying. Maybe this will force the banks etc to comply fully with the legislation. If not, it ain't my falut mate!

No, the real issue here is that people really do need to take responsibility for their debts.

I am no fan of financial institutions, trust me I've received some pretty shoddy treatment over the years. I do absolutely agree that these firms really should be carrying on their business in a much more organised fashion and are as obliged as anyone to operate within the remit of the law.

Look at it in reverse though: imagine if the OP's finance company tried to exploit the law in a similar way to extort money from the OP, there'd be outcry! But because it's a consumer screwing the big bad loan co. it's fine and dandy?

Also I can't see any evidence in the OP's posts that they have been 'shafted' in any way by the finance company.

The main point I'm trying to get across is that if everybody's attitude towards debt was the same as the OP's it'd be a right old mess.

Regards
UNDERGROUND

I_know_my_ABC_and_my_CMYK

The finance sector is actually quite sloppy and does need tightening up. There are too many loop holes which the consumers are now taking to advantage. Sending a CCA is supposed to be used the prove this particular person owes the debt in such cases as someone being chased for a debt that is not theirs. It isn't supposed to be used to avoid paying the debt but because the finance sector is so sloppy many are using this to their advantage and getting away with it as it is totally legal. Catalogue debts are a common one here but the rules have actually changed on this in 2006. Any credit agreement NOT signed before 2007 cannot be enforced in court but after 2007 the debt can be enforced in court regardless of whether a credit agreement was signed or not.

inmypocketnottheirs

UNDERGROUND wrote: »

Look at it in reverse though: imagine if the OP's finance company tried to exploit the law in a similar way to extort money from the OP, there'd be outcry! But because it's a consumer screwing the big bad loan co. it's fine and dandy?

The main point I'm trying to get across is that if everybody's attitude towards debt was the same as the OP's it'd be a right old mess.

Regards
UNDERGROUND

Correct. But that is exactly what finance companies are doing every day. All it will take is a few enlightened individuals to take them to task, and hopefully the industry will tighten up it's procedures. For too long we have lived 'in the dark' and a great number of individuals have been shafted by supposedly reputable institutions who 'never make mistakes'.

Your main point doesn't hold water. It's like the sign 'Keep off the Grass'. The majority will adhere because they live their life by rules. The occasional 'individual' will walk on the grass - why? You tell me. 'But it is just as well that everyone doesn't do it' is a stock reply. But then again:

'Rules are for the guidance of wise men and obedience of fools'

petermb_2

What an interesting thread.

There are a few biased opinions but that is what makes the world interesting.
What cannot be denied as it states quite clearly in the Consumer Credit Act that the lender must provide a copy of the agreement on request for the princely sum of £1. Failure to do so renders the loan unenforceable until they have complied. That is the law. The main reason the lender is reticent to provide a copy is that people like me use them as evidence in court cases.

I have personally caught one lender red handed, with documentary evidence, in that this particular lender is continuing to repossess homes when its management knows full well that the agreements they used at the time would be deemed to be uneforceable in a court of law. I was talking to an industry insider recently who stated that the lender " was merely playing the game". This means that families who are losing their homes, while lenders are "playing the game".

I have no hesitation in stating that I take on the lenders for a living and will use every law and loop hole available because the lenders will do exactly the same to you and me and my clients given the opportunity.

inmypocketnottheirs

petermb wrote: »

What an interesting thread.

There are a few biased opinions but that is what makes the world interesting.
What cannot be denied as it states quite clearly in the Consumer Credit Act that the lender must provide a copy of the agreement on request for the princely sum of £1. Failure to do so renders the loan unenforceable until they have complied. That is the law. The main reason the lender is reticent to provide a copy is that people like me use them as evidence in court cases.

I have personally caught one lender red handed, with documentary evidence, in that this particular lender is continuing to repossess homes when its management knows full well that the agreements they used at the time would be deemed to be uneforceable in a court of law. I was talking to an industry insider recently who stated that the lender " was merely playing the game". This means that families who are losing their homes, while lenders are "playing the game".

I have no hesitation in stating that I take on the lenders for a living and will use every law and loop hole available because the lenders will do exactly the same to you and me and my clients given the opportunity.

Thank you. I rest my case!

rog2

petermb wrote: »

What an interesting thread.

There are a few biased opinions but that is what makes the world interesting.
What cannot be denied as it states quite clearly in the Consumer Credit Act that the lender must provide a copy of the agreement on request for the princely sum of £1. Failure to do so renders the loan unenforceable until they have complied. That is the law. The main reason the lender is reticent to provide a copy is that people like me use them as evidence in court cases.

Exactly, peter - it is, in fact impossible to have an unbiased opinion on such a subject as this, without giving the financial industry 'carte blanche' to behave exactly as they wish.

How many people are 'stuck' in payment plans simply because they were a day late in cancelling their subscriptions, or d-ds?

The Consumer Credit Act 1974 is there to protect the rights of consumers, by 'forcing' the financial sector to follow certain procedures. Provided that they follow those procedures, they will have no trouble in enforcing any credit agreement that they issue.

It is simply not fair for creditors to 'respect the law' when it suits them, yet to expect a degree of 'leniency', that would rarely be reciprocated, from their 'debtors' when the boot is on the other foot.

petermb_2

The problem Rog is that for far too long the financial Services industry has done just that, done exactly as they wished. They have bullied and barged their way through and made ordinary, good people's lives a misery.

Well it is pay back time. I and a few others are armed with enough information to give Financial Services institution's Board members sleepless nights for years. Let the fun begin.

rog2

petermb wrote: »

The problem Rog is that for far too long the financial Services industry has done just that, done exactly as they wished. They have bullied and barged their way through and made ordinary, good people's lives a misery.

Well it is pay back time. I and a few others are armed with enough information to give Financial Services institution's Board members sleepless nights for years. Let the fun begin.

Couldn't agree more, peter. :T :T

jonesMUFCforever

The key wording for me from Peter's posting #25 is ''Failure to do so renders the loan unenforceable until they have complied''.

So they fail to give you a signed copy and you think you have got away with not paying - they then find it and you are back in the brown stuff!

rog2

ejones999 wrote: »

The key wording for me from Peter's posting #25 is ''Failure to do so renders the loan unenforceable until they have complied''.

So they fail to give you a signed copy and you think you have got away with not paying - they then find it and you are back in the brown stuff!

Not quite true, ej. IF they provide a copy of the cca outside of the period allowed under the terms of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, then they must go to the Courts to obtain an order before they can enforce the agreement. At this stage a 'sebtor' would have the opportunity to inform the court that the creditor had failed to supply the cca within the legally specified time span and the court is likely to judge the agreement as 'irrideemably unenforceable'.
This does not affect the fact that the creditor, by not supplying the cca within the 12 working days, plus a further 30, will have committed a criminal offence.