Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'cast'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Campaign
    • Helpful Organisations
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV/Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - Please register
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
  • Work, Social and Community
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
  • Motoring
  • Legal Forums
  • Latest Consumer News

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries
  • Shopping & Money Saving Tips
  • chilleddrivingtuition

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Location

Found 2 results

  1. Hello first timer here. I have had a good read on here about charging orders but some of the information on the threads is a little old and am concerned if there has been any law change or land registry change that would effect my situation. From what i gather i have a restriction and not a charging order as the debt is in my name only but i own my home in joint names with my partner (not married). Throughout the court process this situation was referred to as charging order and also the court paperwork is worded charging order. I believe this is just standard practice ??? Many people say they just like you to believe you have a charging order when in fact it is a restriction??? Am i correct ??? I have other questions to ask about this matter but will wait for responses to what i have already asked before going any further. Thanks.
  2. Hello People I'm being taken to court for the finance co to get possession of my car due to missed payments. I have a couple of issues which I would like someone to clarify if possible please. (Bear with me it's a case of one HP agreement forming part of the current one) Previous car loan was applied for by OH and all negotiations were between him and salesman. OH couldn't get credit so over the phone salesman asked me if there was anyone elses name he could use as we would lose the car otherwise. Reluctantly I gave mine - doh. I was asked to sign some forms and we had the car. I had no idea what the payment terms were at time of signing since OH had agreed the terms not me. (Was this mis-sold to me because of this? It was late 2005 and I had no pre loan info whatsoever either) FFwd 2009 bought another car with £1000 owing on first car. "Not a problem, we can sort that out" says the salesman. I was asked if I wanted a warranty, 'no' I said. Next day I had a call to say 'new loan is agreed and we're throwing in a free warranty'. Great I thought, this is persuading me to def take the new car. I'm now being taken to court as I said so after looking at my HP agreement and other paperwork it turns out the warranty was not free and the RTI insurance was only for a couple of years but I am paying over the life of the loan which I didn't know. So can I counterclaim the warranty, RTI insurance, late payment £30 fees, and the £1000 added onto this agreement from the first agreement since I wasn't told that this is what they were going to do? Had I known I would not have gone ahead at that point, I would have waited the extra 4 months and paid off the first agreement because what is 4 months when the first agreement was over 4 years? Can anyone offer any advice since I have 9 days left to file my defence. Thanks
×
×
  • Create New...