PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

m.colak

tiggrae wrote: »

under FSA / FOS rules they are allowed 6 weeks in which to make financial redress !!!

Spoke to consumer direct and they quoted the distance selling regulations and a limit of 30 days.

tiggrae

m.colak wrote: »

Spoke to consumer direct and they quoted the distance selling regulations and a limit of 30 days.

sorrrrrrry

Laini

tiggrae wrote: »

under FSA / FOS rules they are allowed 6 weeks in which to make financial redress !!!

so is this from when the FOS sends the letter to say we are successful and the company has agreed to redress or from when you send the signed letter of acceptance or is it when they receive the letter from FOS.
FP still havent even sent a letter with any offer yet:wall::wall:

(So I could be looking at next month not this month for my pennies):whistle::whistle::think::think:

At least I know now - thanks

PS I think your draft of letter for Marshallka is fab you can tell its done by a proffessional:A:A:A

Laini xxx:j

tiggrae

tiggrae wrote: »

I think this could be a question for the Office of Fair Trading - they give DAF their Consumer Credit Licence, write and ask them whether what they are doing is legal under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (as amended 2006).

Just found the following under the CCA 1974

Total Charge for Credit

20.—(1) The Secretary of State shall make regulations containing such provisions as
appear to him appropriate for determining the true cost to the debtor of the credit
provided or to be provided under an actual or prospective consumer credit agreement
(the " total charge for credit"), and regulations so made shall prescribe—
(a) what items are to be treated as entering into the total charge for credit, and how their amount is to be ascertained;
(b) the method of calculating the rate of the total charge for credit.
(2) Regulations under subsection (1) may provide for the whole or part of the amount payable by the debtor or his relative under any linked transaction to be included in the total charge for credit, whether or not the creditor is a party to the transaction or
derives benefit from it.

Extortionate Credit

138

.—(1) A credit bargain is extortionate if it—

(a) requires the debtor or a relative of his to make payments (whether
unconditionally, or on certain contingencies) which are grossly exorbitant, or
(b)

otherwise grossly contravenes ordinary principles of fair dealing.

(2) In determining whether a credit bargain is extortionate, regard shall be had to such
evidence as is adduced concerning—
(a) interest rates prevailing at the time it was made,
(b)

the factors mentioned in subsection (3) to (5), and

(c) any other relevant considerations.
(3) Factors applicable under subsection (2) in relation to the debtor include—
(a) his age, experience, business capacity and state of health; and
(b)

the degree to which, at the time of making the credit bargain, he was under

financial pressure, and the nature of that pressure.
(4) Factors applicable under subsection (2) in relation to the creditor include—
(a) the degree of risk accepted by him, having regard to the value of any security
provided;
(b) his relationship to the debtor; and
(c) whether or not a colourable cash price was quoted for any goods or services
included in the credit bargain.
(5) Factors applicable under subsection (2) in relation

139

.—(l) A credit agreement may, if the court thinks just, be reopened on the ground

that the credit bargain is extortionate—

(a) on an application for the purpose made by the debtor or any surety to the High

Court, county court or sheriff court; or

(b) at the instance of the debtor or a surety in any proceedings to which the debtor
and creditor are parties, being proceedings to enforce the credit agreement, any
security relating to it, or any linked transition; or
(c) at the insistence of the debtor or a surety in other proceedings in any court where
the amount paid or payable under the credit agreement is relevant.

(2) In reopening the agreement, the court may, for the purpose of relieving the debtor
or a surety from payment of any sum in excess of that fairly due and reasonable, by
order—
(a) direct accounts to be taken, or (in Scotland) an accounting to be made, between any persons,
(b) set aside the whole or part of any obligation imposed on the debtor or a surety

by the credit bargain or any related agreement,

(c) require the creditor to repay the whole or part of any sum paid under the credit
bargain or any related agreement by the debtor or a surety, whether paid to the
creditor or any other person,
(d) direct the return to the surety of any property provided for the purposes of the
security, or
(e) alter the terms of the credit agreement or any security instrument.

tiggrae

PS I think your draft of letter for Marshallka is fab you can tell its done by a proffessional:A:A:A

Laini xxx:j[/quote]
Hi Laini, basically its from the time the FOS receive your signed forms back and have notified the lender - thanks for the post on the letter - I'm famous for them - once wrote one for a friend to her ex-husband - he had written that she was in breech of agreement, I put back that I assumed me he meant Breach of Agreement as apposed to any reference to mispresentation in childbirth, and for his future reference the 2 different spellings had entirely different meanings - he was spitting feathers, that I had dared to insulted his spelling ability

m.colak

tiggrae wrote: »

Hi Laini, basically its from the time the FOS receive your signed forms back and have notified the lender - thanks for the post on the letter - I'm famous for them - once wrote one for a friend to her ex-husband - he was talking about a breech of agreement, I put back that I assumed me he meant Breach of Agreement as apposed to any reference to mispresentation in childbirth, and for his future reference the 2 different spellings had entirely different meanings - he was spitting feathers, that I had dared to insulted his spelling ability - it was very funny !!!!

I think definently its a matter of perspective here. If you get the FOS involved then its down to their timescales. Otherwise if you do manage to get the matter sorted without the FOS then you are following the timelines of the law. However in the interests of peace and prosperity i would allow them upto 6 weeks or 42 days in the worst case.

Laini

tiggrae wrote: »

PS I think your draft of letter for Marshallka is fab you can tell its done by a proffessional:A:A:A

Laini xxx:j

Hi Laini, basically its from the time the FOS receive your signed forms back and have notified the lender - thanks for the post on the letter - I'm famous for them - once wrote one for a friend to her ex-husband - he had written that she was in breech of agreement, I put back that I assumed me he meant Breach of Agreement as apposed to any reference to mispresentation in childbirth, and for his future reference the 2 different spellings had entirely different meanings - he was spitting feathers, that I had dared to insulted his spelling ability[/quote]

I can imagine!
Thanks for that info - our man at FOS is really good and he said if we dont hear from FP to contact him at the end of the month but just needed to know realistically what time scale I am looking at.:j

marshallka

Can anyone tell me if i am allowed to send my letter to Firstplus about the PPI without adding my husbands signature (we have always both signed) as i got him to sign my version this morning and now tiggrae has made it more professional i have printed off her version and want to send it now. Should i wait for his signature and send it tomorrow or just sign it myself and send it.

rosemahairy

tiggrae wrote: »

Just found the following under the CCA 1974

Total Charge for Credit


20

.—(1) The Secretary of State shall make regulations containing such provisions as

appear to him appropriate for determining the true cost to the debtor of the credit
provided or to be provided under an actual or prospective consumer credit agreement
(the " total charge for credit"), and regulations so made shall prescribe—
(a) what items are to be treated as entering into the total charge for credit, and how their amount is to be ascertained;
(b) the method of calculating the rate of the total charge for credit.
(2) Regulations under subsection (1) may provide for the whole or part of the amount payable by the debtor or his relative under any linked transaction to be included in the total charge for credit, whether or not the creditor is a party to the transaction or
derives benefit from it.

Extortionate Credit

138
.—(1) A credit bargain is extortionate if it—

(a) requires the debtor or a relative of his to make payments (whether

unconditionally, or on certain contingencies) which are grossly exorbitant, or
(b)

otherwise grossly contravenes ordinary principles of fair dealing.

(2) In determining whether a credit bargain is extortionate, regard shall be had to such

evidence as is adduced concerning—
(a) interest rates prevailing at the time it was made,
(b)

the factors mentioned in subsection (3) to (5), and

(c) any other relevant considerations.

(3) Factors applicable under subsection (2) in relation to the debtor include—
(a) his age, experience, business capacity and state of health; and
(b)

the degree to which, at the time of making the credit bargain, he was under

financial pressure, and the nature of that pressure.

(4) Factors applicable under subsection (2) in relation to the creditor include—
(a) the degree of risk accepted by him, having regard to the value of any security
provided;
(b) his relationship to the debtor; and
(c) whether or not a colourable cash price was quoted for any goods or services
included in the credit bargain.
(5) Factors applicable under subsection (2) in relation

139

.—(l) A credit agreement may, if the court thinks just, be reopened on the ground

that the credit bargain is extortionate—

(a) on an application for the purpose made by the debtor or any surety to the High

Court, county court or sheriff court; or

(b) at the instance of the debtor or a surety in any proceedings to which the debtor

and creditor are parties, being proceedings to enforce the credit agreement, any
security relating to it, or any linked transition; or
(c) at the insistence of the debtor or a surety in other proceedings in any court where
the amount paid or payable under the credit agreement is relevant.

(2) In reopening the agreement, the court may, for the purpose of relieving the debtor
or a surety from payment of any sum in excess of that fairly due and reasonable, by
order—
(a) direct accounts to be taken, or (in Scotland) an accounting to be made, between any persons,
(b) set aside the whole or part of any obligation imposed on the debtor or a surety

by the credit bargain or any related agreement,

(c) require the creditor to repay the whole or part of any sum paid under the credit
bargain or any related agreement by the debtor or a surety, whether paid to the
creditor or any other person,
(d) direct the return to the surety of any property provided for the purposes of the
security, or
(e) alter the terms of the credit agreement or any security instrument.

Thanks for this but im struggling to understand it sob sob help lol im blonde (i know bad excuse)

Laini

marshallka wrote: »

Can anyone tell me if i am allowed to send my letter to Firstplus about the PPI without adding my husbands signature (we have always both signed) as i got him to sign my version this morning and now tiggrae has made it more professional i have printed off her version and want to send it now. Should i wait for his signature and send it tomorrow or just sign it myself and send it.

I have only signed our letters, OH only signs agreements or if they request it.
so its your call - you are only relaying information not agreeing to anything plus I think they know you now - cos if you email it no one signs it.
Laini xxx:j