Jump to content

Vulture_Bank

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    273
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Vulture_Bank

  1. Cashflow Services Ltd. Debt Recovery Agency UK and Ireland. clients lients AIB Bank AIB Credit Card Centre Airtricity Bank of Ireland Branches Bank of Ireland Credit Card Centres Bank of Ireland Finance Bank of Scotland (Ireland) Ltd. Bord Gais Calor Gas N.I. Ltd. Chorus Derry Credit Union Ltd. GE Money Health Services Executive HFC Bank MBNA National Irish Bank Northern Ireland Electricity Permanent TSB Phoenix Natural Gas Royal Bank of Scotland Shell Direct N.I. Ulster Bank Maxol Maxol Direct (NI) Ltd.. Cashflow Services Ltd. Debt Recovery Agency UK and Ireland debt purchase Debt Purchase Cashflow Services Ltd. is Ireland's largest Debt Purchaser. We purchase blocks of non-performing accounts subject to analysis of each portfolio. The price offered is dependent on a standard due diligence procedure whereby we analyse criteria in relation to historic collection processes, delinquency and the clients ability to provide original documentation to substantiate the debt. Cashflow Services Ltd. Cashflow Services Ltd. is the largest Irish owned Receivables Management Company in the country and has been an innovator in the field of financial services since the founding of the company over twenty years ago. We are dealing with Ireland's largest companies with receivables of over €85 billion. We offer a total solution in receivables- from day one recoveries through to a full legal facility. Our leadership has brought the business of collecting debt into the age of professional Management, Consultancy, latest Technology and Automation. The technology and management driven solutions backed with our door-to-door collectors put us in the unique position to help you with your requirements. Over the years, CFS has established offices throughout the country and serves clients of every size. Our management and collection staff are highly trained and are backed by many years of experience in the collections field. All employees follow a code of practise at all times to ensure quality of service. We are a results orientated company dedicated to providing a total solution tailored to each client's specific needs Cashflow Services Ltd. Debt Recovery Agency UK and Ireland. defnition of a seamless service ..... when the debtor thinks he is talking to one company and he is actually speaking to another is robin ronan ?? Profiles Chairman/Managing Director Ronan Traynor B.Comm (Acc.) A.C.A Ronan qualified as a Chartered Accountant in 1992 with O'Hare Barry & Associates. He has worked as Financial Accountant with Lakeland Dairies, during the amalgamation of Killeshandra and Lough Egish, and as Group Financial Controller with the QL Group before starting with CFS as Financial Controller in 1994. Ronan was appointed Managing Director in July 1996.
  2. see bankfodders thread many years ago http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/statutes-library/40-unfair-terms-consumer-contracts.html
  3. see http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/139584-application-consumer-credit-act.html
  4. see http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/139584-application-consumer-credit-act.html
  5. see http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/139584-application-consumer-credit-act.html
  6. see http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-knowledge/136447-unfair-contract-terms-consumer.html & http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/44548-contracts-signed-pre-july.html#post1485646
  7. Failure to notify cardholders of the transfer of receivables could delay or reduce payments on your notes. No notice has been given to cardholders of any transfers previously effected, and no notice is expected to be given to the cardholders of any future transfers of receivables to the receivables trustee. The receivables trustee has agreed, amongst other things, that notice of the transfers will not be given to cardholders unless RBS’ long-term senior unsecured indebtedness as rated by Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s or Fitch Ratings were to fall below Baa2, BBB or BBB, respectively. The lack of notice has several legal consequences that could delay or reduce payments on your notes. Until notice is given to a cardholder and, where necessary, a legal transfer of the receivable is made, the cardholder will discharge his or her obligation under that designated account by making payment to the relevant originator. Until notice is given to a cardholder who is a depositor or other creditor of that originator, equitable set-offs may accrue in favour of the cardholder against his or her obligation to make payments to that originator under the designated account. These rights may result in the receivables trustee receiving reduced payments on the relevant receivables. The transfer of the benefit of any receivables to the receivables trustee will continue to be subject both to any prior equities that a cardholder has and to any equities the cardholder may become entitled to after the transfer. Where notice of the transfer is given to a cardholder, however, some rights of set-off may not arise after the date notice is given. Failure to give notice to the cardholder means that the receivables trustee would not take priority over any interest of a later encumbrancer or transferee of the relevant originator’s rights who has no notice of the transfer to the receivables trustee where such later encumbrancer or transferee gives notice. This could lead to a loss on your notes. Failure to give notice to the cardholder also means that the relevant originator or the cardholder could amend the credit card agreement without obtaining the receivables trustee’s consent. This could adversely affect the receivables trustee’s interest in the receivables, which could lead to an early redemption of or a loss on your notes.
  8. Under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 a cardholder may assert claims against the terms of the credit card agreements used by the originators which, if successful, may adversely affect our notes. The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (the ‘‘UTCCRs’’) provide that certain unfair terms in consumer agreements shall not be binding on consumers. A consumer may challenge the fairness of a term in court. If a consumer has made payments under an unfair term obliging the consumer to do so, the consumer may seek to recover those payments or set off those payments against future payments under the agreement. The OFT and other bodies may seek a court order preventing a business from relying on an unfair term. The OFT has power to commence proceedings against card issuers who they believe have breached the UTCCRs, including for injunctive relief. The OFT wrote to RBS in October 2003 regarding a number of terms in its standard credit card terms and conditions. RBS corresponded with the OFT and has resolved all of the issues except in relation to the level of administration charges. RBS has expressed throughout that it believes the level of its administration charges is fair and does not contravene the UTCCRs. The OFT engaged in a three month consultation period with RBS and seven other major credit card companies on the level of credit card administration charges in 2005. RBS (and the other main UK credit card providers) each received a letter from the OFT dated 25 July 2005 (believed to be in broadly similar terms). In the letter, the OFT set out its preliminary conclusion that the level of administration charges levied by the main UK credit card issuers is excessive. The OFT gave RBS and the other card issuers three months to give certain undertakings in relation to the way in which administration charges are estimated or to otherwise address the OFT’s concerns. On 25 July 2005 the OFT expressed the provisional view that the level of these charges needs to be reduced in order to be fair. RBS responded to the OFT’s letter on 24 October 2005 declining to give any undertakings and setting out its reasons for rejecting the OFT’s assertion that these charges are unfair. However, on 5 April 2006, the OFT made an announcement to the press and public at large: * setting out its view of the principles credit card issuers should follow in setting default charges in their standard contracts with consumers in order to meet the test of fairness under the UTCCR 1999; and * stating that those principles have wider implications for analogous standard default terms in other agreements including those of mortgages, bank current accounts and storecards. In summary, the OFT’s view is that default charge provisions are unfair if they have the object of raising more in revenue than is reasonably expected to be necessary to recover certain limited administrative costs incurred by the credit card issuer. The OFT has adopted a ‘‘two fold regulatory strategy’’ to deal with its finding: (i) it has purported to provide guidance to credit card issuers which can be used by those credit card issuers in order to arrive at a fair default fee; (ii) a simple threshold of £12 has been set for intervention by the OFT on default charges. The OFT has informed customers that they are free to take account of its statement in deciding whether to question default fees that they have been charged. Although RBS continues to believe that the level of its administration charges has always been fair and transparent, and disagrees with the legal position set out in the OFT’s announcement, on 5 June 2006 RBS responded to the OFT confirming that it would reduce its late payment and overlimit fees to £12. RBS’ other administration fees are already set below the OFT’s intervention limit. If the administration charge in an RBS credit card agreement was found to be unfair, the receivables trustee may not receive payments from borrowers which it might currently expect to receive. A reduction in the level of administration charges may result in a reduction in the amounts received by RBS under its credit card agreements. Furthermore, if any term of the credit card agreements was found to be unfair, RBS may be subject to claims from cardholders seeking reimbursement of administration charges paid although these amounts will not be payable by the receivables trustee in the case of credit card agreements in the securitised portfolio.
  9. Application of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 Application of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 may impede collection efforts and could cause early redemption of your notes and/or a loss on your notes. The primary statute dealing with consumer credit in the United Kingdom is the Consumer Credit Act 1974 – which we will refer to in this base prospectus as the ‘‘Consumer Credit Act’’. The Office of Fair Trading (the ‘‘OFT’’) is responsible for the issue of licences under, and the superintendence of, the CCA, related consumer credit regulations and other consumer protection legislation. The OFT may review businesses and operations, provide guidelines to follow and take action when necessary. Currently, a credit agreement is regulated by the CCA where (a) the borrower is or includes an individual, (b) the amount of ‘‘credit’’ as defined in the CCA does not exceed the financial limit, which is £25,000 for credit agreements made on or after 1 May 1998 and lower amounts for credit agreements made before that date and © the credit agreement is not an exempt agreement under the CCA. A vast majority of the credit card transactions which occur on a designated account have or will have a credit limit of an amount up to £25,000. Accordingly, the Consumer Credit Act applies to the transactions occurring on the designated accounts and, in whole or in part, to the credit card agreements. This may have consequences for your investment in the notes because of the possible unenforceability of, or possible liabilities for misrepresentation or breach of contract in relation to, an underlying credit card agreement. (a) Enforcement of improperly executed or modified credit card agreements Any credit card agreement that is wholly or partly regulated by the CCA or treated as such has to comply with requirements under the CCA as to licensing of lenders and brokers, documentation and procedures of credit card agreements and (in so far as applicable) pare-contract disclosure. If it does not comply with those requirements, then to the extent that the credit card agreement is regulated by the CCA or treated as such, it is unenforceable against the borrower (a) without an order of the OFT, if the lender or any broker does not hold the required licence at the relevant time, (b) totally, if the form to be signed by the borrower is not signed by the borrower personally or omits or mis-states a ‘‘prescribed term’’ or © without a court order in other cases and, in exercising its discretion whether to made the order, the court would take into account any prejudice suffered by the borrower and any culpability of the lender. If a credit card agreement related to a designated account has not been executed or modified in accordance with the provisions of the Consumer Credit Act and is completely unenforceable as a result, the principal receivables arising thereon will be treated as ineligible receivables. See ‘‘The Receivables – Representations’’. With respect to those credit card agreements which may not comply with the Consumer Credit Act, such that a court order could not be obtained, the originators estimate that, on any pool selection date or additional selection date, this will represent less than 1 per cent. of the aggregate principal amount of receivables in the designated accounts. The originators do not anticipate any material increase in the percentage of these receivables in the securitised portfolio. In respect of those designated accounts that do not comply with the Consumer Credit Act, it will still be possible to collect amounts owing by cardholders and seek arrears from cardholders who are falling behind with their payments. It is unlikely that the originators will have an obligation to pay or to account to a cardholder for any payments received by an originator because of this non-compliance with the Consumer Credit Act. Any such receivables will be treated by the receivables trustee as ineligible receivables. See ‘‘Representations’’.
  10. Application of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 may impede collection efforts and could cause early redemption of your notes and/or a loss on your notes. The primary statute dealing with consumer credit in the United Kingdom is the Consumer Credit Act 1974 – which we will refer to in this base prospectus as the ‘‘Consumer Credit Act’’. The Office of Fair Trading (the ‘‘OFT’’) is responsible for the issue of licences under, and the superintendence of, the CCA, related consumer credit regulations and other consumer protection legislation. The OFT may review businesses and operations, provide guidelines to follow and take action when necessary. Currently, a credit agreement is regulated by the CCA where (a) the borrower is or includes an individual, (b) the amount of ‘‘credit’’ as defined in the CCA does not exceed the financial limit, which is £25,000 for credit agreements made on or after 1 May 1998 and lower amounts for credit agreements made before that date and © the credit agreement is not an exempt agreement under the CCA. A vast majority of the credit card transactions which occur on a designated account have or will have a credit limit of an amount up to £25,000. Accordingly, the Consumer Credit Act applies to the transactions occurring on the designated accounts and, in whole or in part, to the credit card agreements. This may have consequences for your investment in the notes because of the possible unenforceability of, or possible liabilities for misrepresentation or breach of contract in relation to, an underlying credit card agreement. (a) Enforcement of improperly executed or modified credit card agreements Any credit card agreement that is wholly or partly regulated by the CCA or treated as such has to comply with requirements under the CCA as to licensing of lenders and brokers, documentation and procedures of credit card agreements and (in so far as applicable) pare-contract disclosure. If it does not comply with those requirements, then to the extent that the credit card agreement is regulated by the CCA or treated as such, it is unenforceable against the borrower (a) without an order of the OFT, if the lender or any broker does not hold the required licence at the relevant time, (b) totally, if the form to be signed by the borrower is not signed by the borrower personally or omits or mis-states a ‘‘prescribed term’’ or © without a court order in other cases and, in exercising its discretion whether to made the order, the court would take into account any prejudice suffered by the borrower and any culpability of the lender. If a credit card agreement related to a designated account has not been executed or modified in accordance with the provisions of the Consumer Credit Act and is completely unenforceable as a result, the principal receivables arising thereon will be treated as ineligible receivables. See ‘‘The Receivables – Representations’’. With respect to those credit card agreements which may not comply with the Consumer Credit Act, such that a court order could not be obtained, the originators estimate that, on any pool selection date or additional selection date, this will represent less than 1 per cent. of the aggregate principal amount of receivables in the designated accounts. The originators do not anticipate any material increase in the percentage of these receivables in the securitised portfolio. In respect of those designated accounts that do not comply with the Consumer Credit Act, it will still be possible to collect amounts owing by cardholders and seek arrears from cardholders who are falling behind with their payments. It is unlikely that the originators will have an obligation to pay or to account to a cardholder for any payments received by an originator because of this non-compliance with the Consumer Credit Act. Any such receivables will be treated by the receivables trustee as ineligible receivables. See ‘‘Representations’’. a new thread concerning the above text has been commenced see http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/139584-application-consumer-credit-act.html
  11. In August 1999, Dixons spun off Freeserve, the U.K. ’s largest Internet services provider. Because of the strong relationship between Dixons and Household, Household was able to win the partnering relationship with Freeserve. Freeserve was the first co-branded partner under the marbles™ brand, which was launched in October 1999. Marbles was one of the first Internet-enabled credit cards in the U.K., and the featured credit card on the Freeserve website In January 2000, the Dixons Group announced the sale of Freeserve to Wanadoo S.A. ------------------------------ HFC History HFC Bank was established in 1973 as the UK arm and wholly-owned subsidiary of Household International Inc, one of the largest independent consumer finance businesses in the United States. In the UK, we have adapted and moulded ourselves over the last 30 years to ensure we have remained at the forefront of consumer finance. Initiatives such as being the first high street lender to open all day Saturday and introducing children´s play areas in all our branches have helped keep us ahead of the pack. HFC Bank entered the direct lending market in 1993 by launching Hamilton Direct Bank which specialises in unsecured personal lending. This is achieved by dealing direct with the public, via the telephone, post and Internet. In 1994 we entered the UK credit card market with the successful launch of the GM Card from Vauxhall. Today HFC Bank has over 1.5 million card holders and 80 plus card programmes, including the internet-enabled marbles™ card. In 1998, HFC Bank merged with Beneficial Bank resulting in a new bank in terms of scale, size and opportunity. This merger was a significant milestone in our history - expanding our market presence and improving our growth potential. In March 2003 both Household International Inc. and HFC Bank plc became part of the HSBC Group. Subsequently HFC Bank has become a limited company and Household International Inc. has become HSBC North America Holdings. __________________
  12. for those who want to understand securisation and follow football see this thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/139504-arsenal-fc-via-securisation.html#post1484500 to understand how it all works
  13. Arsenal Football Club To Securitize Ticket Revenues (June 30, 2006) U.K. soccer team Arsenal Football Club is planning to securitize future revenues from ticket sales to refinance its new 60,000 capacity stadium in North London, the first time such an offering has been made publicly in the U.K. Barclays Capital and Royal Bank of Scotland are arrangers and are providing liquidity and swaps, and Ambac Assurance U.K. is providing a AAA monoline wrap. Arsenal Securities PLC, a special purpose vehicle rated BBB-, will offer £260 million of fixed- and floating-rate notes backed by sales of both season tickets and match day tickets. Robert Robinson, analyst at Standard & Poor's, said the deal is structured to take account of the large lump sum of sales during the summer from season tickets, as well as a steady stream throughout the season from match day sales. Robinson said since the stadium itself is almost finished, the process has moved beyond the project financing stage and the key risk now is the team's performance. "Arsenal will need to do well, but have to remain financially prudent. They can't go crazy in the transfer market." This is a first-of-its-kind transaction in England, and similar transactions are only likely to involve the top five or six teams there. "These are teams who play regularly in European competitions and can fill stadiums," he said, adding some smaller provincial teams with local followings were unlikely to be considered as they are too small. Yossi Kraemer, head of the syndicate group at RBS, said this could be a viable structure for many sides because it refinances an existing debt on a stadium building project, rather than attempting to increase debt further by purchasing new expensive players based on the assumption of future domestic and European success. Since there is a 25-year amortization period, the cash flows have been stressed and risks mitigated. Should Arsenal fail to make it into the Champions League, or become a mid-table side or are relegated, these risks have all been taken into account. Kraemer said there are other ways to find the money in the event of a fall in ticket sales. "Since it's structured like a whole business securitization, we can access other revenues such as broadcasting rights, sponsorship deals, and a whole other raft of monies." He stressed, however, that all season tickets have been sold, and all the executive box tickets have been sold. In addition there are waiting lists for season tickets. if they get in trouble they know where to come
  14. Enfield's charge to collect unpaid council taxJun 8 2006 Enfield Borough Council has collected £500,000 in unpaid council tax in the last year by putting charging orders on the property of reluctant payers. The strategy was suggested and implemented by Incasso LLP, the Leeds-based debt collection arm of the top 50 law firm, Cobbetts. The thinking behind the initiative was simple, as Geoff Waterton, Enfield’s Head of Collection explained. “Some people were living in valuable properties but they were resisting all our attempts to persuade them to pay their arrears, which often ran into thousands of pounds. “We decided to target particularly difficult cases, where it was clear that people were not unable but fundamentally unwilling to pay.” The process leading up to a possible order for sale is one which needs to be followed to the letter. First there is an application to the county court for an interim charging order. The application contains information on the debtor, their current address, copies of outstanding liability orders and office copies of HM Land Registry documents as evidence that the property is owned by the debtor. In most cases, after an interim order has been granted, there is a further hearing to ask the court to make a final or absolute order. In theory, this doesn’t compel the debtor to pay, unless they sell or remortgage. “But, in practice,” said Geoff, “the imposition of a charging order has been shown to have an important psychological effect. People who haven’t paid us anything for years have started to pay off their arrears.” In the last year alone, Incasso LLP has handled 320 of these cases, prompting payments of unpaid council tax of £500,000. “If we had simply stayed with the bailiff route, I don’t think we would have brought in more than £200,000,” said Geoff. “By obtaining a charge, we were securing the debt against the property and, for those cases where Incasso LLP have applied for a forced sale, I’m delighted to say that the county court gave judgment in our favour each time and we haven’t had to sell a single property. The threat of the enforced sale was enough to get people to pay in full, including all our costs as well.” Among the cases that Incasso LLP has pursued was one involving a £500,000 property where the owner had racked up £12,000 in unpaid council tax. The property was finally remortgaged and the debt - and costs - paid. These methods have proved so successful that Enfield is now lowering the bar when it seeks orders for sale. This has dropped to £5,000 in unpaid council tax - but the formula continues to be a winning one.
  15. quote "ACQUISITION AND USE OF CREDIT CARD ACCOUNTS Barclaycard uses a brand led, value driven marketing strategy to focus new origination campaigns. This process is assisted by the use of financial forecasting models for each method it uses to solicit cardholders. Barclaycard recruits a significant proportion of its customers by introductions from Barclays branches. It also uses, among others, targeted mailing, media inserts and the internet. When received, credit application details are screened by a combination of system based checking, external credit bureau data and manual verification, where appropriate. Barclaycard uses a range of application scorecards to assess the credit quality of new account applications, each of which are tailored towards different market segments. Scorecards are derived using a combination of factors in respect of each relevant customer including their Barclays account history, annual income, time at and place of residence, current employment and credit bureau data. A proprietary cash flow model is used to help determine the acceptance score levels for each scorecard. Acceptance score levels are reviewed at least quarterly by committee. Barclaycard aims to maximise enterprise value through managing the relationship between volumes and margins. Recent yield experience reflects adjustments to interest rate discounts and fee waiver thresholds to optimise this position. The initial limit of an account is determined using credit score and income matrices. Initial limits are set at comparatively low levels. Limits are increased in a controlled and regular manner using behaviour score and credit bureau data. Behaviour scoring was introduced in 1989 and is one of the key tools used by Barclaycard in risk management and underpins all risk decisions applied to accounts once they have been opened. Barclaycard currently use behaviour scorecards developed in conjunction with Fair, Isaacs International UK Corporation, an independent firm experienced in developing credit scoring models. The behaviour scorecards are monitored using retrospective sampling which allows a comparison of actual to expected performance over predetermined time periods. This analysis allows the effectiveness of the scorecards to be measured on a regular basis, and underpins the decisions on scorecard development. Credit limits are adjusted based upon Barclaycard's continuing evaluation of an account holder's credit behaviour and suitability using Triad V, the latest account management system developed by the Fair, Isaacs Companies. Each cardholder has a card agreement with Barclaycard governing the terms and conditions of their MasterCard or VISA account. Under each card agreement, Barclaycard is able, if it gives advance notice to the cardholder, to add or change any terms, conditions, services or features of the MasterCard or VISA accounts at any time. This includes increasing or decreasing periodic finance charges, or minimum payment terms. Each card agreement enables Barclaycard to apply charges to current outstanding balances as well as to future transactions. Barclaycard regularly reviews its credit and charge card agreement forms to determine their compliance with applicable law and the suitability of their terms and conditions. If they need to be updated or amended, this will be done on a timetable consistent with the issues identified. "
  16. "FAILURE TO NOTIFY The transfer by the transferor to the receivables CARDHOLDERS OF trustee of the benefit of the receivables is governed THE TRANSFER OF by English law and does not give the receivables RECEIVABLES COULD trustee full legal title to the receivables. Notice to DELAY OR REDUCE the cardholders of the transfer would perfect the PAYMENTS ON legal title of the receivables trustee to the YOUR NOTES receivables. The receivables trustee has agreed that notice of the transfer will not be given to cardholders unless the transferor's long-term senior unsecured indebtedness as rated by Moody's, Standard & Poor's or Fitch were to fall below Baa2, BBB or BBB, respectively. The lack of notice has several legal consequences that could delay or reduce payments on your notes. Until notice is given to a cardholder, the cardholder will discharge his or her obligation under the designated account by making payment to the transferor. "
  17. quote "MATERIAL LEGAL ASPECTS OF THE RECEIVABLES CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974 A significant number of the credit transactions that occur on a designated account will be for items of credit extended to a cardholder for an amount up to [GBP]25,000. The Consumer Credit Act applies to these transactions and, in whole or in part, the credit or charge card agreement establishing each designated account. This has certain consequences for the designated accounts, including the following: Enforcement of improperly executed or modified card agreements If a credit or charge card agreement has not been executed or modified in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act, it may be unenforceable against a cardholder without a court order -- and in some instances may be completely unenforceable. As is common with many other UK credit and charge card issuers, some of Barclaycard's credit and charge card agreements do not comply in all respects with the Consumer Credit Act or other related legislation. As a result, these agreements may be unenforceable by Barclaycard against the cardholders without a court order. The transferor gives no guarantee that a court order could be obtained if required. With respect to those credit or charge card agreements which may not be compliant, such that a court order could not be obtained, Barclaycard estimates that this would apply to less than 1 per cent. of the aggregate principal receivables in the designated accounts on 31 December 2002. Barclaycard does not anticipate any material increase in this percentage of receivables in the securitised portfolio. The accounts that do not comply with the Consumer Credit Act are still legal, valid and binding obligations of the relevant cardholder and it will still be possible to collect payments from cardholders willing to pay their debt and demand arrears from cardholders who are falling behind with their payments. The transferor will have no obligation to repay or account to a cardholder for any payments received by a cardholder because of this non-compliance with the Consumer Credit Act. However, if losses arise on these accounts, they will be written off and borne by the investor beneficiary and transferor beneficiary based on their respective interests in the receivables trust. Liability for supplier's misrepresentation or breach of contract Transactions involving the use of a credit or charge card in the United Kingdom may constitute transactions under debtor-creditor-supplier agreements. A debtor-creditor-supplier agreement includes an agreement where the creditor, with knowledge of its purpose, advances funds to finance a purchase by the debtor of goods or services from a supplier. Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act provides that, if the supplier is in breach of the contract -- whether such contract is express or implied by law -- between the supplier and a cardholder in certain debtor-creditor-supplier agreements or if the supplier has made a misrepresentation about that contract, the creditor may also be liable to the cardholder for the breach or misrepresentation. The liability of the transferor for a designated account is called a "Transferor Section 75 Liability". In these circumstances, the cardholder may have the right to reduce the amount owed to the transferor under his or her credit or charge card account. This right would survive the sale of the receivables to the receivables trustee. As a result, the receivables trustee may not receive payments from cardholders that it might otherwise expect to receive. As a result, the receivables trustee may not receive the full amount otherwise owed by a cardholder. However, the creditor will not be liable where the cash price of the item or service supplied concerning the claim is [GBP]100 or less, or greater than [GBP]30,000. The receivables trustee has agreed to indemnify the transferor for any loss suffered by the transferor arising from any claim under section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act. This indemnity cannot exceed the original outstanding principal balance of the affected charges on the designated account. The receivables trustee's indemnity will be payable from excess spread on the receivables. Any amounts that Barclaycard recovers from the supplier will reduce Barclaycard's loss for purposes of the receivables trustee's indemnity. Barclaycard will have rights of indemnity against suppliers under section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act. Barclaycard may also be able to charge-back the transaction in dispute to the supplier under the operating regulations of VISA or Mastercard. If Barclaycard's loss for purposes of the receivables trustee's indemnity exceeds the excess spread available to satisfy the loss, the amount of the excess will reduce the Transferor Interest accordingly. "
  18. On top of that the debt has already been sold and needs to be bought back .... it's all in the way "they work "
  19. can we have an update thanks and the prominence of the reference to the consumer credit act 1974 is too small as well
  20. (edit) nice little picture hosted here
  21. obviously we had a soothsayer registrant !!!saw this site a long time ago natwestfraud.com......life suddenly becomes very interesting regarding NatWest registered the sucks domain .... perhaps we should say the ownwership "passed" into ownership of natweat then from some irate owner !!! after a nominet enquiry or whatever
  22. whilst in this post i make no comment whatsoever concerning the need for signatures etc to satisfy s78 etc can i just refresh to the world that as I have said for over a year the failure to produce the original terms and conditions can at a stroke - meaning sooner than later -(if we have a knowledgable creditor who thus avoids losing court costs) lead to a total write off and the debtors balance being credited so that the balance is zero as the above case states.
  23. at least mbna cannot do this (reconstitute ) regarding all those former building society credit card agreements they serviced as they have nothing to reconstitute which backs up the reasoning why they sell the accounts s
×
×
  • Create New...