CCA Returned for Alliance & Leicester I'm the 2nd Customer on form 1st is bankrupt is CCA unenforceable

[th3joker]

Hi,

 

I had a severe head injury in July 2003, which left me unable to work. We lost our house and savings.

 

My wife and I took out a loan with Alliance & Leicester in May 2004 to tide us over until I could return to work. My condition got worse and my wife had to stop working to look after me fulltime.

 

Financially things got bad very quickly, my wife was advised to look into bankruptcy and did so in 2005 or 2006.

 

Alliance and Leicester then started hassling me to pay the loan, I couldn’t even remember signing the agreement. But I started to pay a token amount of £10 per month. Which continues today.

 

After seeking advice on another debt on here I decided to request the CCA from A&L for this loan. They replied enclosing the CCA, which I had indeed signed.

 

My Wife is the primary customer (1st Customer) and all her details are included on the document. Full name, address, DOB, Telephone number etc.

 

I am mentioned on it as the 2nd customer and the only details of mine are:

Surname:

Forenames:

Date of Birth:

They are correct and all present, my query is this; I was under the impression that a CCA should have more comprehensive details of the person(s) taking out the loan and indeed signing a CCA for the purpose of binding a CCA to that person(s).

 

I’ve uploaded some scans of the CCA on photobucket here:

 

and here:

[Guest dvdriley]

have they sent any terms and conditions

[th3joker]

This was the last part

 

[Guest dvdriley]

bump

[th3joker]

Should I have posted this in another area?

 

I had a good look but there are CCA related questions in quite a few different categories so wasn't too sure.

 

If it's the wrong area could a moderator please move it for me.

[th3joker]

Bump

[th3joker]

anyone?

[th3joker]

I've looked over the CCA help pages and it does seem to stipulate that name and address must be present.

It is present under the primary applicant, mine as the second applicant isn't included.

Would that be enough to classify it as unenforceable?

 

Many thanks.

[th3joker]

bump

[baileyboy]

I would assume that if both names are on the agreement, then both individuals are jointly and seperately liable. If one cannot pay, then the other is chased for payment. Looks enforceable to me. IMHO.

[th3joker]

I've since been put under the court of protection because I'm not able to manage my own affairs.

 

They are paying a token amount to A&L for now.

 

The head injury was in 2003 and we took out the loan in 2004, since I now have CoP and am no longer able to take out credit due to the inability to understand or manage my financial affairs. With this in mind I probably shouldn't have included my name on a loan application post head injury in the first place.

 

We simply don't have the money to pay this and legally I shouldn't have been signing agreements in the first place.

 

What are my options? The CoP Solicitors aren't very helpful and will just continue to pay this rather than actually addressing the fact that it should never have been allowed in the first place.

[cerberusalert]

Was this loan taken out before your bankruptcy, if so it should have been included in it.

[th3joker]

It was included on my wife's bankruptcy but since I came under the CoP they would not sanction a bankruptcy.

 

So what was once a loan with my wife as primary borrower and myself as secondary became a loan to just me when she went bankrupt.

 

So I am solely liable, my question is does the paperwork stand up and how would I stand having my part of the agreement declared null due to me being incapable of making these decisions and hence coming under the CoP due to that very reason.

[th3joker]

It was symptomatic of the injury at that time that I signed it in the first place. The loan had been accepted anyway in just my wife's name and I had no need to add my name to it.

 

In fact I can't remember why I even did it now.

[th3joker]

The above paperwork was returned when I asked for the CCA using the letter templates CAG provided.

 

So is the documentation correct and a proper CCA and enforceable.

[cerberusalert]

I'm afraid because you were both co-signaturees you were both joint and several liable, which means A&L could chase both or either of you for payment. Obviously because of your wife's bankruptcy they couldn't chase her, that's why they are demanding you pay.

 

Unfortunately the prescribed terms are present in the agreement and would be seen as enforceable.

 

If your personal debts are £15K or less and you do not own property, have a read of Debt Relief Order - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia