Fixed sum loan agreement for car purchase query !

[cosalt]

Hi everyone,

 

I am currently having trouble with a Black Horse agreement that was signed at a dealers premises in 2007.

 

Basically we had a car on an existing HP agreement and went to PX it for a replacement. Problem was we owed approx £1800 more on the HP than the PX value of the car. They said this was no problem as they could add it to the new agreement.

 

The invoice from the dealer clearly spells this out, showing the part ex figures, settlement and new finance figures.

 

The new agreement we signed is a 'fixed sum loan agreement' which has details of the car on it. I am aware this is different to a HP agreement as I believe they can not reposess.

 

My question is as this new agreement shows the purchase price of the car as the the total amount including the shortfall on the previous HP agreement, is this correct? Does this not become a multiple agreement as part of the borrowings was to pay off the shortfall and part to fund the new car? I clearly have the invoice with the actual vehicle cost, but the loan agreement shows the car price as £1800 more.

 

Hopefully this makes sense !!

 

Cosalt:)

[citizenB]

Might be worth askin gyour question on the following thread as well:D

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/171037-multiple-agreements-falling-within.html

 

HTH:D

[cosalt]

Thanks citizen, have posted on that thread as well !

 

Cosalt:)

[cosalt]

gentle bump!

[nicklea]

I would suggest that you have recieved one loan for a certain amount of money. Whether you then use that money for one thing or more than one thing has no impact on how many loans you have taken out.

 

Just my thoughts

[cosalt]

Thanks nicklea,

 

I understand what you mean, my concern is that I have an invoice saying the purchase price of the car is (figures not accurate) £20,000, part exchange £15,000, Settlement on old agreement £16,800. Then the new agreement says purpose of loan purchase car, reg no XXXX, model no XXXX etc etc purchase price £21,800. I was obviously aware at the time they were adding in the shortfall, but can they actually do this ?

 

Cosalt

[cosalt]

Hi Just an update really.

 

This is still ongoing, but I think is coming to a head now. I have now looked back and seen that the agreement I had previously and was refinanced, was with the same company.

 

So what they have done is paid off the loan for the previous car and refinanced the new car plus the shortfall, all without mentioning any of it on the new agreement ?

 

Can they do this ?

 

Any help appreciated

[cosalt]

Hi,

 

Could really do with some advice on this, can anyone tell me the requirements for settling old loans on new agreements etc?

 

Thanks again

 

Cosalt

[IdaInFife]

can you scan and post it up? to see the exact layout?

 

ida x

[cosalt]

Hi Ida, thanks a lot for looking in.

 

I can post up the the agreement but it doesnt really say much, it just says the car purchase price is £21,800 and that is the amount of the loan. All prescribed terms are there, and the APR is correct.

 

The problem is that the invoice to the finance company states the car price as being less than the agreement price, and the balance is the shortfall from the previous agreement.

 

I feel this could be a multiple agreement as part of the loan was to pay off previous finance and part to purchase the new car, yet it is not shown as separate on the agreement.

 

Cosalt

[IdaInFife]

my understanding:

 

a multiple agreement is when there are different types of 'credit'

 

i.e unrestricted use and restricted use.

 

the fixed sum would be a restrcited and so would the refinance

 

 

11.—(I) A restricted-use credit agreement is a regulated consumer credit agreement—

(a) to finance a transaction between the debtor and the creditor, whether forming

part of that agreement or not, or

(b) to finance a transaction between the debtor and a person (the " supplier") other

than the creditor, or

© to refinance any existing indebtedness of the debtor's, whether to the creditor or

another person,

and " restricted-use credit" shall be construed accordingly

 

 

i think

 

unless i am thinking wrong

 

 

ida x

 

[cosalt]

Ok, thanks again, I think I understand !

 

So probably not a multiple agreement but can they still do what they did. Especially as the old agreement was the same lender ?

[IdaInFife]

hope i am wrong

 

just seen that part of the act and it sort of covers the two of them

 

I knoe , for some strange reason, your posts regarding this havenlt had a lot of hits.

 

hopefully someone can confirm or deny it for sure

 

Ida x

[cosalt]

Thanks again Ida, this should bump it up again for me !

 

Cosalt

[IdaInFife]

and so should this

 

ida x

[cosalt]

Just an update,

 

Have today received a DN for this account. The arrears amount must contain charges as it is more than the missed payments.

 

Also I dont think the dates are correct, it came by TNT post ( which I assume is 2nd class ) dated 9th September, with a remedy date of 28th September. I make this 1 day out ?

 

Anyone able to confirm the DN is invalid.

 

Thanks

[cosalt]

Bump

[cosalt]

I have had a letter today offering me a voluntary surrender on the car, they will send it to auction and deduct it from the balance on the loan.

 

I see little point in this as they hae no right to take the car and it will probably only clear 50% of the loan. This leaves us with no car but still a loan to pay.

 

I really could do with some advice on whether the agreement is correct based on what I said above, also the dates on the default notice.

 

Thanks

[lexis200]

Just an update,

 

Have today received a DN for this account. The arrears amount must contain charges as it is more than the missed payments.

 

Also I dont think the dates are correct, it came by TNT post ( which I assume is 2nd class ) dated 9th September, with a remedy date of 28th September. I make this 1 day out ?

 

Anyone able to confirm the DN is invalid.

 

Thanks

 

I think I'd rely more on the charges than the dates tbh as it seems to me to be a bit iffy as to whether you could argue that point.

 

As far as I can see, the 9th was a weds, so if we allow 4 postal days that gives till Monday making it 14 days dead. If you don't count Saturday then it falls short assuming TNT is a second class timescale (I'm not sure on that?). However, although we are all perfectly aware that times for postage state working days, I'm not entirely sure you could convince a judge not to count the Saturday as a day that post is sorted/arrives.

 

Just my opinion, but I'd be a bit iffy about using that as an argument.

 

The arrears including charges though is a big no-no so I'd focus on that as it is a real problem for them.

 

Can't give advice on the loan front I'm afraid as it's not my area at all. Having said that nothing is really my area but I know less about loans than about everything else;)

 

Lexis:)

[cashins]

As far as I can see, the 9th was a weds, so if we allow 4 postal days that gives till Monday making it 14 days dead. If you don't count Saturday then it falls short assuming TNT is a second class timescale (I'm not sure on that?). However, although we are all perfectly aware that times for postage state working days, I'm not entirely sure you could convince a judge not to count the Saturday as a day that post is sorted/arrives.

 

 

Assuming you have the envelope still?

 

TNT, (with an S on the envelope is 2nd) which TNT say 3 days, however guidance to the courts on this issue says clearly 4 working days for 2nd which makes it a day short.

 

It would however be wise to look at other aspects of the DN also so, can you post the thing up (removing personal details!) as they very often screw up the wording, ammounts etc.

 

David

[AA99]

Hi cosalt:) I have a very similar issue with a vehicle bought from Carcraft, financed by GEMoney, now passed to Link:mad:

 

None of the figures on my contract seem to make sense. Their DN was defective and nobody wanted to accept a reduced repayment offer:mad:

 

Also haven't been able to get much help either and have subscribed to

Car Credit Complaints. They and Stephensons got Yes closed down:cool:

 

My thread is here if you want to look at my contract figures and DN

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/161277-aa99-ge-money-car.html

[cosalt]

Thanks so much everyone for the quick response.

 

The amount of arrears definately contains charges, the missed payments are £3851.73 the arrears amount on the DN is £4271.73 which is the missed payments plus £420 charges.

 

Is this enough to make the DN invalid ?

[cashins]

Hi Cosalt

 

Posted on your other thread re the default.

 

Reagarding the £420 charges, I would not say that sum is a de minimus issue, however a judge could disagree.

 

David

[postggj]

as rerquested

 

can you post up the dn for confirmation

[postggj]

spelling