3.6 In addition, we operate the credit licensing regime under the 1974 Act.

This requires us to be satisfied that a person is fit to engage in consumer

credit activities. In doing so we must have regard to all relevant matters

including whether the trader, or an associate or former associate, has

contravened relevant legislation or

has engaged in business practices

which are deceitful or oppressive or otherwise unfair or improper,

whether unlawful or not.

I like this paragraph

3.24 Part 8 is not a means of pursuing individual redress. It applies only to

means that the breach must affect, or have the potential to affect,

consumers generally or a group of consumers.

3.25 The unfair relationships provisions in section 140A apply to an individual

relationship between a lender and a borrower. However, the lender may

enter into such relationships with more than one consumer, and in doing

so may, by virtue of acts or omissions giving rise to unfairness, have an

adverse effect on a number of them.

3.26 It is not necessary for the harm to each consumer to be the same, or to

be felt in the same way. And in some cases there may be a risk of harm

which has yet to translate into actual detriment. It is not necessary to

demonstrate actual loss to consumers for Part 8 action to be available.:grin:

3.27 In considering the scope for Part 8 action based upon the unfair

relationships provisions, the OFT would consider whether there is a

common factor which is likely to make a number of individual

relationships 'unfair' and so harm the collective interests of consumers.

It would not be necessary to demonstrate that there is more than one

'unfair relationship', or to adduce evidence to that effect, if it can be

shown that the common element in the lender's behaviour may give rise

to such a relationship in a number of cases.

3.28 For example, a lender may use standard terms in its agreements with

consumers, or may operate in a common manner in respect of borrowers

generally or a group of borrowers. The practice may give rise to

unfairness in each case, or in a number of cases, and so may harm the

collective interest. Again, it is not necessary for the practice to occur in

all cases, or to have the same impact on borrowers. It may be sufficient

that it gives rise to an unfair relationship in one case and has the

potential to do so in others.

I'm off to get a copy of the 2006 CCA (I've already got the Enterprise Act), and get the proper wording - I might start kicking a**e on this front.

4.17 For example, the borrower may be unaware that a fee would be charged

the debt. He may also be unaware that rates might increase in particular

circumstances, or were unlikely to reduce in line with changes in the

market. The lender may have failed to disclose relevant information, or

may have done so in an unclear or misleading manner. As a result, the

consumer may not have entered into the transaction in full knowledge of

the facts. He may also have had, in the circumstances, no real choice as

to acceptance of the particular terms.

i.e. Accept our charges or we won't give you an account!