Jump to content

scoobyd00

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by scoobyd00

  1. That's just plain cheeky! Surely they can't reallocate payments assigned against installments to cover LPI. That's rubbish surely! Personally I wouldn't waste any time with the criminal allegation - the police are not much cop and as soon as you mention a finance agreement you will be fobbed off with the old 'it's a civil matter' response (whether or not there is any merit to your allegation). I think that the best move may be for you to follow the complaints procedure for the finance co - if you have already made a formal complaint the finance co should already have advised you of their complaints procedure. Standard procedure is for them to have 4-8 weeks to provide a final response to your complaint. Once you have the final response, you can complain to the Financial Ombudsman Service. I think it might be an idea to get the ball rolling on this. Bear in mind that the FOS won't look at your complaint if you have a court hearing pending (i.e. a date set). Are you planning to issue proceedings against the finance co or just to enter a counterclaim when they issue against you? If the latter, it will probably take them a while to issue against you - in which case, following the complaints procedure and then going to the FOS might be an option. Of course issuing proceedings yourself would almost certainly bring the matter to the attention of someone more senior in the finance co. I would also consider complaining to the OFT. Sounds like they are backtracking and trying to justify their actions to me. Luckily for you you have the original default notice showing over 1/3 paid!
  2. Hmm...have these charges been documented in the agreement as to when (i.e. the circumstances under which) they become chargeable and the amount of each charge? I suppose there may be an issue as to whether these charges are fair and reasonable. I am fairly sure that under one of the more recent ammendments to the CCA that the finance co should also provide you with written advice as to any charges debited from your account. I would say that if the payments you have been making are in respect of the monthly installment amount then you could argue that those payments were intended as payments in respect of the contractual installments and that they should not have been applied to any outstanding charges (which may or may not be enforceable and may or may not be documented in your finance agreement). It would probably come down to whether or not you were liable under the contract for the charges that they applied to your account, i.e. whether you were notified in the agreement that charges may be applied for non-payment. As I say, I think these charges would either need to be laid down in detail or represent a 'reasonable' charge...
  3. I agree - definition of 'total price of the goods' in the Consumer Credit Act is : the total sum payable by the debtor under a hire-purchase agreement or a conditional sale agreement, including any sum payable on the exercise of an option to purchase, but excluding any sum payable as a penalty or as compensation or damages for a breach of the agreement; I have had a bit of a chat with a friend 'in the know' and he advised that the deposit should form part of the 'total price of the goods'. Indeed I can't see why not, as it still forms part of the price paid by you in respect of the goods. I would also refer to the original finance agreement, presumably the deposit is mentioned in the breakdown?? If so, I would invite the finance co to advise why they consider that the deposit is not part of the 'total sum payable' under the agreement and provide authority in law. As for the issue of trespass, the CCA also provides as follows: 92 Recovery of possession of goods or land (1) Except under an order of the court, the creditor or owner shall not be entitled to enter any premises to take possession of goods subject to a regulated hire-purchase agreement, regulated conditional sale agreement or regulated consumer hire agreement. (3) An entry in contravention of subsection (1) or (2) is actionable as a breach of statutory duty. I'm not entirely sure of the consequences of a breach of statutory duty in this case, which is why I mentioned in a previous post that it may be considered just a techinical trespass. If anyone can advise of authority/reported cases or legal principles that would suggest a breach of s92 leading to a decision to 'cancel' the finance agreement then i would be very interested to hear it. Like I said earlier, I think you would have a case in respect of trespass but unless the damages can be quantified (e.g. they damaged your driveway,etc) then I can't see what a court would award you. I would definitely press on with the suggested course of action re the deposit though. I guess checking the agreement would help..
  4. Absolutely - as long as: i) your agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act (CCA) (i.e. it is between you as an individual and the finance co, rather than in the name of a limited company) and; ii) you have paid more than one third of the balance owing under the agreement and; iii) there has not been a court hearing and a judgment made for the return of the goods then yes, you should be entitled to claim back all the money paid under the agreement and thereby be restored to the position you were in prior to signing the agreement. As per my previous post - even if they do have a court order (judgment for delivery of goods), it would need to have been executed by a court bailiff. Incidentally, I would also say that you have very reliable evidence of civil trespass in the written receipt provided to you. This is only really a 'technical' trespass and your damages for winning a separate action for trespass would be minimal. However, the finance co will need to defend the case and this could cost them hundreds of pounds - if you really wanted to twist the knife, I would suggest you advise them that you will also be considering legal action for trespass unless they can offer you suitable compensation. Let me know if you need any more help
  5. Hi, Forceably removing a vehicle which was supplied under a Consumer Credit Act regulated agreement from private property is a breach of s92 of the CCA and is a breach of statutory duty under the Act. This means that the courts could award damages for trespass and all losses which might be foreseen as resulting from the breach, e.g. things like hire of an alternative vehicle/loss of use/court costs etc. The proper course of action for the creditor to have taken would have been to apply for a court order. It should also be noted that the court order should be enforced by a COURT bailiff acting on a warrant of possession and not by a private repossession agent - who does not have the authority to enforce County Court orders and should not hold himself out as having such authority. I would suggest you bring this up with the creditor/assignee and also that you make a complaint to the OFT regarding the conduct of the repossession agent. To give this a bit of perspective, why should any private debt collector be able to remove a lock to gain access to your private property? He is no more authorised to do so than you are, since he acts with no authority from the courts whatsoever. It simply shouldn't happen and that's why the law protects people in your situation....
  6. If they do proceed to get a court order for the return of the vehicle, make absolutely sure that the people who come to collect are bailiffs from the County Court issuing the court order (acting under a WARRANT FOR POSSESSION) and not just private repossession agents trying to enforce a court order that they have no power to enforce. A lot of repo agents/finance companies are just exploiting a lack of knowledge on the part of the public - PM me if they do attempt to do this and I will let you know exactly how to deal with it!!
  7. Hi there, All DCA's collecting debts from individual consumers (including RAM Recovery) will need to hold a Consumer Credit Licence (Category F; Debt Collection). If you really want to cause a problem for RAM them I would suggest that you complain to the Office of Fair Trading (which issues licences and deals with complaints against licence holders. Email enquiries['AT' sign]oft.gsi.gov.uk to get the ball rolling - I would specifically refer to the exact wording of the messages and record any calls that you receive. The OFT Debt Collection guidance requires that DCA's do not act in a threatening manner, so you will need proof that RAM have done this. Good luck
×
×
  • Create New...