Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the xx/xx/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the xx/xx/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, xx/xx/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Prescribed terms in fixed sum variable rate agreements.Yorkshire Bank


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2647 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Am I correct that the prescribed terms for a fixed sum variable rate consumer credit act agreement is:

 

a amount of credit

b interest rate

c amount of payment

 

Credit £25,000

 

Interest £9.319,57 applied at 4.5% above banks base rate 5%

 

payments £408.68 x 84

 

Theres no total amount payable as this could alter due to an interest change throughout the time of the agreement. However, the amount of credit plus the interest applied to the credit do NOT equal the initial monthly payment?

 

£25,000 plus £9.319.57 = £34,319.57 divide by 84 payments = £408.56

 

This payment appears to be 12 pence less than the payment stated on the agreement. Anyone clued up on this?

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

As its a variable rate loan/agreement then 12p is neither here nor there, looks quite normal as far as agreements go.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As its a variable rate loan/agreement then 12p is neither here nor there, looks quite normal as far as agreements go.

 

So you believe misstating a prescribed term is irrelevant?

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

what do you think Andy?

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you believe misstating a prescribed term is irrelevant?

 

No a prescribed term is very relevant, but if the interest rate varies at any point then the monthly payment by nature will also vary, so in that respect a 12p difference is really quite irrelevant.

 

Where is it you are trying to go with this, annulment of agreement maybe?

 

Couldn't see a court in the land agreeing there was an issue to be frank.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No a prescribed term is very relevant, but if the interest rate varies at any point then the monthly payment by nature will also vary, so in that respect a 12p difference is really quite irrelevant.

 

Where is it you are trying to go with this, annulment of agreement maybe?

 

Couldn't see a court in the land agreeing there was an issue to be frank.

 

Payments under a loan agreement are a prescribed term are they not?

 

Regards

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Stop sitting on fence Andy. If the payments are incorrect on a loan agreement would it render it unenforceable????/

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bottom is getting sore anyway now...sorry Paul only just got back on the forum:-)...I personally would have to agree with Martin...it wouldn't render it unenforceable IMHO...but it would allow you to possibly seek recompense..subject to the age and how much the payments have varied?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bottom is getting sore anyway now...sorry Paul only just got back on the forum:-)...I personally would have to agree with Martin...it wouldn't render it unenforceable IMHO...but it would allow you to possibly seek recompense..subject to the age and how much the payments have varied?

 

Andy, my understanding is that if a prescribed term has been misstated it renders the agreement unenforceable. have i got this wrong??

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

What date is the agreement Paul?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pre April 2007...therefore is it missing or just misleading.....s61(1)(a) Consumer Credit Act 1974.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pre April 2007...therefore is it missing or just misleading.....s61(1)(a) Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

 

The credit limit in Wilsons case was not missing it was mis stated this rendered the agreement unenforceable.

 

Ive been contacted by a pensioner who's husband recently passed away. The bank are withholding ppi totalling £33k that was mis sold on several loans. Ive read the letter sent to her MP last week and it reveals her husband never signed what the bank refers to a regulated agreement as an "amendment" document.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?335464-Prescribed-terms-in-an-agreement

 

Have a read of this thread, post *3 is particularly relevant, note the use of the ANY under 3) Repayments

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?335464-Prescribed-terms-in-an-agreement

 

Have a read of this thread, post *3 is particularly relevant, note the use of the ANY under 3) Repayments

 

 

Im aware of this and if they use "any" they must make sure "any" is correct.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Within 3) Repayments, at point (f) The power of the creditor to vary any of the above.

We are talking 12p in variation!

 

I still believe its such a trivial point that no court in the land is going to render it unenforceable. Unless of course there are other enforceability issues?

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Within 3) Repayments, at point (f) The power of the creditor to vary any of the above.

We are talking 12p in variation!

 

I still believe its such a trivial point that no court in the land is going to render it unenforceable. Unless of course there are other enforceability issues?

 

Varying an agreement is totally different to miss stating a prescribed term.

 

If the interest rate in a running credit account (prescribed term) is stated as 29% but is actually 28% do you think a court has the power to enforce just because it's a small differential??

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

But that isnt the case that you are referring to, you are referring to a 12p differential on a variable rate loan.

 

I really dont want to engage in a huge debate with you about it, i have given what i believe to be a fair assessment based on the information provided.

You are of course under absolutely no obligation to heed a word i have said.

 

With that in mind i dont think i can be of any further help and will take this opportunity to allow others to comment and shall bow out.

 

Regards

 

Martin2006

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But that isnt the case that you are referring to, you are referring to a 12p differential on a variable rate loan.

 

I really dont want to engage in a huge debate with you about it, i have given what i believe to be a fair assessment based on the information provided.

You are of course under absolutely no obligation to heed a word i have said.

 

With that in mind i dont think i can be of any further help and will take this opportunity to allow others to comment and shall bow out.

 

Regards

 

Martin2006

 

The payments assume no variation of interest in the cca agreement otherwise they could be stated as any amount.

 

Case law confirms a prescribed term cannot be slightly mis-stated.

 

I'll post tomorrow once I have an experts view on this.

 

33. In my judgment the objective of Schedule 6 is to ensure that, as an inflexible condition of enforceability, certain basic minimum terms are included which the parties (with the benefit of legal advice if necessary) and/or the court can identify within the four corners of the agreement. Those minimum provisions combined with the requirement under section 61 that all the terms should be in a single document, and backed up by the provisions of section 127 (3), ensure that these core terms are expressly set out in the agreement itself: they cannot be orally agreed; they cannot be found in another document; they cannot be implied; and above all they cannot be in the slightest mis-stated. As a matter of policy, the lender is denied any room for manoeuvre in respect of them. On the other hand, they are basic provisions, and the only question for the court is whether they are, on a true construction, included in the agreement. More detailed requirements, which are designed to ensure that the debtor is made aware, so far as possible, of specified information (including information contained in the minimum terms) are to be found in Schedule 1.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about APR's is that they must be accurate but there is a very narrow margin of tolerance , even at 0.01% the difference would be far greater than the 12p

 

The rounding may easily be to do with the way interest is calculated

 

As for the PT's you missed the number of payments and when they should start

 

The actual variation is 0.1% in APR

The Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983.pdf

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about APR's is that they must be accurate but there is a very narrow margin of tolerance , even at 0.01% the difference would be far greater than the 12p

 

The rounding may easily be to do with the way interest is calculated

 

As for the PT's you missed the number of payments and when they should start

 

The actual variation is 0.1% in APR

 

[ATTACH]65763[/ATTACH]

 

Say the credit is stated as £10k and the interest is £2k (assumes no variance in the rate over the length of the loan) and theres 60 monthly payments, the first payment to be paid one month after the loan is drawn. What would the agreement state the monthly payment to be?

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Say the credit is stated as £10k and the interest is £2k (assumes no variance in the rate over the length of the loan) and theres 60 monthly payments, the first payment to be paid one month after the loan is drawn. What would the agreement state the monthly payment to be?

 

 

Credit plus interest = £12k divide by 60 = £200. Is this correct?

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a question

 

Is this a defaulted loan that you want to challenge in court or is it an academic discussion?

 

If it was from 2007 and 7 years it should of course have been paid off now.

 

If it has been defaulted , how much is left ?

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a question

 

Is this a defaulted loan that you want to challenge in court or is it an academic discussion?

 

If it was from 2007 and 7 years it should of course have been paid off now.

 

If it has been defaulted , how much is left ?

 

Its to be challenged.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...