RCI Financial Services

[Bevsboy]

I am fairly new to this , so any help and advice gratefully received

 

My wife bought a Renault Twingo about 15 months ago with a loan from RCI Financial Services. After a few months, our income situation changed dramatically, and she fell behind with her payments. Kept RCI informed of the situation, offering a payment programme to clear the arrears, but three letters that we sent them never received a response. (The words "customer" and "service" are fairly alien concepts to staff at RCI - see other threads!).

 

My wife did telephone RCI during this period, and experienced a conversation with an unpleasant character, who basically inferred she was lying, and was not in a position to meet any agreed payment programme.

 

A default notice was subsequently issued, but as we had already written to RCI offering a payment programme, we thought that this would be taken into account.

 

Before the terms of the default noticed expired, we wrote again to RCI, saying that our income situation had improved, and we could clear the arrears in full by the end of the month, and resume normal payments again.

 

Two days later, we received a letter from RCI advising that as the terms of the default notice had not been met, and the agreement had been cancelled.

 

A few days later, without any prior warning or arrangement, an agent from RCI turned up unannounced to take possession of the car.

 

I immediantly sent a letter to the MD of Renault (His name is M.Roland Bouchra if anyone would like to know) and Stewart Ewens who is the Head of Complaints at RCI. I asked for this to be treated as a formal complaint, and received a reply advising that we had been assigned a "dedicated Complaints Administrator" who would respond within 10 working days.

 

That was dated 7th November 2008, and we are STILL awaiting a reply from the obviously not quite so dedicated "complaints administrator" -

 

I make that 7 months and counting!

 

In fact, we didn't hear anything until 26th March when we received a letter from Matthew Arnold and Baldwin, a firm of solicitors acting for RCI, demanding a payment of over £5,000 within 4 working days. This was the alleged shortfall of the sale of the car at auction, and the outstanding amount of credit, (which appears to include all future interest).

 

No evidence of the sale was supplied, nor any information on how the additional amount had been calculated. The car hadn't been sold for three months after it was repossessed, and we had no evidence of the mileage and condition at the time of the sale. Its value had also reduced during this period, especially in view of the effect of the credit crunch on car values. We pointed this out to the solicitor

 

We asked whether we could set up a payment plan to clear the debt over a period of time, and was sent an income and expenditure form to complete, which we should returm with an offer of payment.

 

This was sent back to the solicitor with an offer of £50.00 per month, which we suggested was reviewed at six monthly intervals, to see if it could be increased.

 

Heard nothing further until a few days ago, when we received a claim form from Watford County Court, in respect of the alleged debt.

 

E-mailed the solicitor to see why we had not received an answer to our offer, and was advised that they wrote on 27th May, advising that their client had rejected our offer of payment, and invited us to consider increasing the offer. The letter gave us a deadline of 4th June to respond.

 

No such letter was ever received by us, and I asked for a copy to be e-mailed, together with a copy of the letter from RCI rejecting our offer of payment.

 

All of a sudden, the solicitors seem to become nervous about dealing via e-mail. They asked for all future dealing to be done by post, but did attach a letter dated 27th May, which states that having taken the clients further instructions, the client has rejected the offer of payment as being insufficient to adequately service the loan.

 

The letter contained no mention of any deadline for a reply.

 

When I pressed them further for the rejection letter from RCI, they confirmed that there was no letter , and the decision was taken by a "manager" at the solicitors under mandate.

 

They maintained that their letter of 27th May was deemed correctly served by the Post Office despite the fact that is was never received by us, and they suggested that we take the matter up with the post office!!

 

When I then queried why there was no mention of the deadline of 4th June in their letter of 27th May, I was advised that they are under no obligation to put in writing the date of the deadline, and they gave us sufficient time to have responded to the letter they allegedly sent on 27th May with no deadline date on it!!

 

I now have seven days remaining, in which to respond to the Claim Form.

 

I would dearly like to take this to court, but does anyone think we have a realistic chance of winning, or getting our original payment accepted.

 

I remember seeing a great letter on a previous thread, basically telling a creditor and/or solicitor that if the case went to court it was highly likely that the proposed reduced payment would be accepted. Can anyone remember this.

 

Sorry to have dragged on, but my wife has suffered some really bad health in the middle of all this, and I feel that she would not be up to a court appearance. (I have told the solicitors this)

 

Hope someone can help

 

Thanks

[faza]

1) do you have the paperwork which sets out the charges in full and itemised.

 

2) do you have a copy of the contract you signed up to.

 

3) have a look through the contract and charges and see if any are in contrivance to the OFT's guidance to unfair contracts and terms:

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/unfair_contract_terms/oft311.pdf

 

4) if you dont have any of the relevant paper work regarding charges, contract etc you can follow the following link which will give you an idea of the defence to make:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/204093-template-needed-embarassed-defence.html

 

if you decide to use the template please edit it to fit your particular needs.

 

regarding the payment plan of £50 per month, the problem is the finance companies will want to charge default charges and interest on the outstanding balance and if they get a judgement then on the judgement sum, so for example if you owe £5000 they will want to charge you contractual interest on this. if your interest is 10% then thats £500 a year plus any other charges they apply. so if you offer them £50 a month you are just covering interest and not paying off the principal in that respect it would take you along time to pay of the debt.

 

what you might want to do is, get hold of the breakdown of what they are charging see if there are any charges that are unfair and what you can challenge.

 

secondly if the claim goes to court make a reasonable monthly payment offer and ask the judge/court to stop the interest accruing on the balance and explain to the court/judge your circumstances so they can be understanding to your situation.

 

you might also want to have a read of the following links:

 

Hire purchase and debt : Directgov - Money, tax and benefits

 

and also:

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/con...dit/oft809.pdf

 

 

 

 

I am not a legal expert I might have made mistakes in what i have written. If you have found any mistakes please feel free to point them out. Anything posted on this forum is for discussion purposes only. It should not be considered as legal advice. Different people have different needs and what is right for one person may be different for another. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an legal expert who can advise you after finding out more about your situation.

Edited June 13, 2009 by faza

[Bevsboy]

Thanks Faza - really helpful advice.

 

One further point if anyone can help. The solicitor acting for RCI, gave the impression in writing that our payment offer was sent to RCI for consideration, but in reality, an employee in the solicitors office made the decision to reject our offer on the basis of a mandate that they hold from RCI. The rejection was not transmitted to us for 10 days, giving the impression that this had been referred to the original creditor. Isn't this deception? - Do I have any right to see the mandate they hold.

 

Once again, any help would be gratefully received

[faza]

from the way the finance companies behave it might be better dealing with the solicitors.

 

an easy way to find out if the solicitor is messing you about is to phone RCI and offer them the payment, if they tell you the solicitors are now dealing with it, you know the solicitors have the authority to accept payment or not.

[trooper68]

I am fairly new to this , so any help and advice gratefully received

 

My wife bought a Renault Twingo about 15 months ago with a loan from RCI Financial Services. After a few months, our income situation changed dramatically, and she fell behind with her payments. Kept RCI informed of the situation, offering a payment programme to clear the arrears, but three letters that we sent them never received a response. (The words "customer" and "service" are fairly alien concepts to staff at RCI - see other threads!).

 

My wife did telephone RCI during this period, and experienced a conversation with an unpleasant character, who basically inferred she was lying, and was not in a position to meet any agreed payment programme.

 

A default notice was subsequently issued, but as we had already written to RCI offering a payment programme, we thought that this would be taken into account.

 

Before the terms of the default noticed expired, we wrote again to RCI, saying that our income situation had improved, and we could clear the arrears in full by the end of the month, and resume normal payments again.

 

Two days later, we received a letter from RCI advising that as the terms of the default notice had not been met, and the agreement had been cancelled.

 

A few days later, without any prior warning or arrangement, an agent from RCI turned up unannounced to take possession of the car.

 

I immediantly sent a letter to the MD of Renault (His name is M.Roland Bouchra if anyone would like to know) and Stewart Ewens who is the Head of Complaints at RCI. I asked for this to be treated as a formal complaint, and received a reply advising that we had been assigned a "dedicated Complaints Administrator" who would respond within 10 working days.

 

That was dated 7th November 2008, and we are STILL awaiting a reply from the obviously not quite so dedicated "complaints administrator" -

 

I make that 7 months and counting!

 

In fact, we didn't hear anything until 26th March when we received a letter from Matthew Arnold and Baldwin, a firm of solicitors acting for RCI, demanding a payment of over £5,000 within 4 working days. This was the alleged shortfall of the sale of the car at auction, and the outstanding amount of credit, (which appears to include all future interest).

 

No evidence of the sale was supplied, nor any information on how the additional amount had been calculated. The car hadn't been sold for three months after it was repossessed, and we had no evidence of the mileage and condition at the time of the sale. Its value had also reduced during this period, especially in view of the effect of the credit crunch on car values. We pointed this out to the solicitor

 

We asked whether we could set up a payment plan to clear the debt over a period of time, and was sent an income and expenditure form to complete, which we should returm with an offer of payment.

 

This was sent back to the solicitor with an offer of £50.00 per month, which we suggested was reviewed at six monthly intervals, to see if it could be increased.

 

Heard nothing further until a few days ago, when we received a claim form from Watford County Court, in respect of the alleged debt.

 

E-mailed the solicitor to see why we had not received an answer to our offer, and was advised that they wrote on 27th May, advising that their client had rejected our offer of payment, and invited us to consider increasing the offer. The letter gave us a deadline of 4th June to respond.

 

No such letter was ever received by us, and I asked for a copy to be e-mailed, together with a copy of the letter from RCI rejecting our offer of payment.

 

All of a sudden, the solicitors seem to become nervous about dealing via e-mail. They asked for all future dealing to be done by post, but did attach a letter dated 27th May, which states that having taken the clients further instructions, the client has rejected the offer of payment as being insufficient to adequately service the loan.

 

The letter contained no mention of any deadline for a reply.

 

When I pressed them further for the rejection letter from RCI, they confirmed that there was no letter , and the decision was taken by a "manager" at the solicitors under mandate.

 

They maintained that their letter of 27th May was deemed correctly served by the Post Office despite the fact that is was never received by us, and they suggested that we take the matter up with the post office!!

 

When I then queried why there was no mention of the deadline of 4th June in their letter of 27th May, I was advised that they are under no obligation to put in writing the date of the deadline, and they gave us sufficient time to have responded to the letter they allegedly sent on 27th May with no deadline date on it!!

 

I now have seven days remaining, in which to respond to the Claim Form.

 

I would dearly like to take this to court, but does anyone think we have a realistic chance of winning, or getting our original payment accepted.

 

I remember seeing a great letter on a previous thread, basically telling a creditor and/or solicitor that if the case went to court it was highly likely that the proposed reduced payment would be accepted. Can anyone remember this.

 

Sorry to have dragged on, but my wife has suffered some really bad health in the middle of all this, and I feel that she would not be up to a court appearance. (I have told the solicitors this)

 

Hope someone can help

 

Thanks

 

Welcome Bevsboy

 

 

 

Was this on HP or a Loan, like from a bank or from the dealers finance?

How much was the car and how much did you pay, was it more than a 3rd? If it was they have an issue.

Do you have a copy of the agreement? Could you paste it up(remove all id)

 

I would Subject access request them, they must supply you with all information relating to the customer. Do both, Finance and Sol. Record Delivery. cost is £10, postal order is better than cheque (no signature)

Print you name on the letter. Ther are examples in the forum.

 

The complaint....really is not good enough, they should give you a full explination within a month, report them to Financial Ombudsman

08450801800, they will send them a letter requesting they explain themselves, you shold get a reply within a day or so stating they will look in to it. They have 8 weeks to report to you. If they do not go back to the ombudsman.

 

Tip KEEP ALL LETTERS AND ENVOLOPES (dates)

 

They may reavel more than should. You may get a better picture of what went on.

 

Trooper68

[Bevsboy]

Thanks trooper - I'll SAR both RCI and the solicitor tomorrow. How does this stand with returning the claim form to the court. (I've only seven days left) Can I ask for more time pending a reply to the SAR's

 

Thanks also to Faza for your continued input - You're both a great help

[faza]

what you could do is make an embaressed defence plea, saying youve asked the defendant for information regarding the claim but they havnt supplied you with anything yet so until you have all the information you can not accept the claim.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/204093-template-needed-embarassed-defence.html

 

once you get all the information then look through it to find anything you can challenge or counter claim on.

 

 

 

I am not a legal expert I might have made mistakes in what i have written. If you have found any mistakes please feel free to point them out. Anything posted on this forum is for discussion purposes only. It should not be considered as legal advice. Different people have different needs and what is right for one person may be different for another. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an legal expert who can advise you after finding out more about your situation.

[trooper68]

Thanks trooper - I'll SAR both RCI and the solicitor tomorrow. How does this stand with returning the claim form to the court. (I've only seven days left) Can I ask for more time pending a reply to the SAR's

 

Thanks also to Faza for your continued input - You're both a great help

 

 

Faza states. Enter an Ebaressed Defence.

 

Search the forum, there are pleanty of templates and docs.

[Bevsboy]

I did have a trawll through all the correspondence from RCI/Solicitors over the weekend. The default notice was issued on 10th September, giving until 30th September to pay arrears. During this period, sent letter suggesting payment programme which was never replied to. Letter received from RCI 11th October saying agreement cancelled due to nonm-compliance of Default Notice. Sent another letter stating we could pay off arrears, and revert to contractural payments. Again no reply received, and car repossessed week later.

 

Amount being claimed is £1500 more than on default notice. Can they add these sort of charges, bearing in mind car was repossessed over 5 months previously

 

HAVE

[trooper68]

I did have a trawll through all the correspondence from RCI/Solicitors over the weekend. The default notice was issued on 10th September, giving until 30th September to pay arrears. During this period, sent letter suggesting payment programme which was never replied to. Letter received from RCI 11th October saying agreement cancelled due to nonm-compliance of Default Notice. Sent another letter stating we could pay off arrears, and revert to contractural payments. Again no reply received, and car repossessed week later.

 

Amount being claimed is £1500 more than on default notice. Can they add these sort of charges, bearing in mind car was repossessed over 5 months previously

 

HAVE

 

Did you pay more than a 3rd?

These letters you sent off, did you do it by recorded delvery?

As for charges, they can, however they must explain them if you complain. They should show all the charges in a seperate sheet/s to your account-the SAR may reveal what is on there systems, your file. You will get a better picture. If they fail to send anything, report them to the data commisioner.

 

If there is anything you want to ask, how silly the question, ask. There is always someone who help.

 

I'm doing the same thing to another company, surprising how much a letter costs!!!

 

Trooper68

[r&b]

can u post up the Default Notice so it can be checked. its not just the dates that have to be rite on a DN.

and whats the 7 days, is that for a defence to filed?

can u post up the Particulars Of Claim.

SAR is useful but u might need the info a bit quicker than the 40 days they are allowed so u may wish to take a look at CPR disclosure:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/159445-getting-them-reveal-their.html

[Bevsboy]

Thanks r&b, and to everyone else who is helping

 

Will post Default notice, once I have worked out how to do it!

 

In the meantime, more help needed please, if anyone can

 

Wrote to solicitors using template letter from the forum which I've posted below

 

 

CPR 18 - REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

 

I have received a recent court claim from your clients.

In order to file a defence and counter claim I require some information. Given that this matter is now the subject of legal proceedings, you are obliged to disclose under the Civil Procedure Rules, the information and documents detailed below.

 

The information must be furnished within fourteen days of the receipt of this letter.

If you fail to comply, this will be reported to the Court, a copy of this letter will be provided as evidence to the same and an Order enforcing your compliance will be sought.

 

1. All records you hold on me relevant to this case, including but not limited to:

a. transcriptions of all telephone conversations recorded and any notes made in relation to telephone conversations by your company, or by any previous creditor

b. Where there has been any event in my account history over this period which has required manual intervention by any person, I require disclosure of any indication or notes which have either caused or resulted in that manual intervention, or other evidence of that manual intervention in relation to my account..

c. True copies of any notice of assignment and/or default notice or enforcement notice that you or the original creditor sent me, with a copy of any proof of postage that you hold.

d. Documents relating to any insurance added to the account, including the insurance contract and terms and conditions, date it was added and deleted (if applicable).

e. Details of any collection charge added to the account; specifically, the date it was levied, the amount of the charge, a detailed financial breakdown of how the charge was calculated, and what the charge covers.

f. Specific details of the fees/charges levied by any other agency in respect of this account and a detailed breakdown of said fees/charges and what each charge relates to and on what date said fees/charges were levied.

g. A genuine copy of any notice of fair use of my data as required by the Data Protection Act 1998

h. A list of third party agencies to whom you have disclosed my personal data and a summary of the nature of the information you have disclosed.

i. Copies of statements for the entire duration of the credit agreement.

 

3. Any other documents you seek to rely on in court.

 

I will require this information within the next fourteen days. I must advise you that if the information is not forthcoming, it will be reported to the Court that you are trying to frustrate proceedings and denying me the opportunity to file a defence and counter claim.

 

Yours sincerely,

The solicitors have sent a pretty frosty response, accusing me of being "heavy handed", and sending "numerous lengthy letters". Since when was trying to defend yourself heavy handed!

Anyway, they have stated that "an obligation to produce documents under CPR 18 is a mistake, and a different section deals with the relevant disclosure obligations, but even so CPR Part 27 specically excludes any obligation to disclose until the Court chooses to make such order of its own initiative. As this case will most probably be allocated to the small claims court, it is unlikely that such an order would be made"

Has anyone got any suggestions for a suitable reply (without being heavy handed of course!)

Thanks

 

 

 

[r&b]

hi bevsboy,

how very awful of u beng heavy handed with those poor little solicitors using rules designed to give a level playing field in the judicial system...shame on u !!!

in all seriousness, actually id like someone to answer this as it seems to be cropping up a bit. as i understand it the SCT is generally for straightforward cases below the £5k threshold. the CCA1974 however is rarely straightforward and is open to quite complex argument in parts and should therefore arguably be seen handled in the fast track.

any more ideas on this?

are u keeping an eye on timeframes by the way, when is ur defence due in?

[Bevsboy]

Thanks for the quick response. I think that I am OK with timeframes at the moment - I returned the Acknowledgement of Service form back to the court yesterday which gives me a further 14 days,

One point from the solicitors letter - I've pointed out on several occasions that the reason repossession took place was the fact that RCI did not respond to three seperate payment proposals which I made in writing (They have a history of not replying to correspondence - see other threads) The solicitor maintains that my letters do not place any obligation on either the client or the solicitor to respond in detail to the points that I have raised.

Presumably, they want to be selective regarding which points of a letter they choose to reply to - presumably the easy ones!

[r&b]

Did you pay more than a 3rd?

Trooper68

 

also, did u have an answer for troopers point here? as i believe with loans of this nature they cannot legally take possession if u have?

[Bevsboy]

Unfortunately, less than a third had been paid, so I presume they didn't need a court order

[trooper68]

Unfortunately, less than a third had been paid, so I presume they didn't need a court order

 

 

Hi Bevsboy

 

Sorry to here that, you will need to look at the small print on you agreement. It may state "conditions" of recovery etc etc.

 

Trooper68

[Bevsboy]

One further point that I would appreciate an answer to. My request that appeared to have rattled the solicitors cage so much was made under CPR 18. Should it have actually been made under section 7 of the CCA. Sorry to be a pain but the whole matter is having an adverse effect on my wife's health and she wants to just give up Thanks in advance

[r&b]

ok thats out then. i think they are right actually on the cpr18. think u shud have dun 31.14 on the link above but u still have time . how about smtg like this:

 

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your letter of xx xxxx 2009 in reply to my request for disclosure under the Civil Procedure Rules Part 18.

I must point out however, that I believe there to be errors in your argument for not complying with such request:

Firstly, in answer to your accusation of my being ‘heavy handed’, I feel my response is totally congruent to the situation in which you and your client have placed me. I would not deem the requirement of vital documentation, on which you seek to litigate, heavy handed. In fact I view it as reasonable and essential to defending myself in this action. The repossession of a motor vehicle when a debtor had made reasonable offers of payment however, may come under that label!

With regard to your claim that CPR27 ‘specifically excludes any obligation to disclosure’ as ‘this case will most probably be allocated to the small claims court’. May I refer you to CPR26.8 which deals with matters relevant to allocation to track and in particular part (1)© which states:

“(1) When deciding the track for a claim, the matters to which the court shall have regard include-

© the likely complexity of the facts, law or evidence;”

As this case revolves around the issue of the enforceability of complex contract documents governed by the Consumer Credit Act 1974, I fail to see how this can possibly be allocated to small claims track and therefore I am at liberty to ask for disclosure under the CPR as this case should clearly be allocated to fast track due to its complexity in law.

As you deem my request under CPR18 as an incorrect request, I enclose a CPR31.14 request for disclosure which I consider appropriate and not in any way disproportionate to these proceedings.

For the reasons outlined above I would appreciate a swift response such that I may formulate a defence to the case against me and save the resources and time of the Court by dispensing with the need to file an embarrassed defence and subsequent amendments. I trust you do not take offence to this letter and take it in the manner in which it was sent.

Yours Faithfully

 

 

dont send it yet as id rather have some input first to make sure its appropriate. need to get smth off in next day or so tho so u can get reply in b4 ur def is due. if anyone can have a look and see wot they think on this wud be appreciated. i ll ask someone to have a look anyway.

 

CPR31.14 thread here give them 7 days to respond:

http://consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/159445-getting-them-reveal-their.html

[42man]

Bevsboy....can I ask what the particulars of the claim are please ? (but don't be specific with the actual amounts).....also what is the date on the termination ? any insurance/PPI added to the loan at all ?

[Bevsboy]

Sorry to have been so long in coming back to all you guys who have helped us. We made a couple of offers of payment to RCI via their Solicitors which were both rejected. Case eventually went to Court, and despite the fact we submitted a statement of income and expenditure together with an affordable offer of payment, judgement was made for the full amount. We didn't actually attend the hearing as it involved a 150 mile round trip, train fares of over £140 and was very thoughtfully scheduled on the day of our Silver Wedding anniversary! On receipt of the judgement, we made an application to the Court for a Variation of the original order based on our ability to pay. This was sent on 16th September 2009, and subsequently confirmed as received by the Court. On 1st October I received notifcation from the Court that RCI had successfully applied for an Interim Charging Order on our house, and confirmed that a hearing for the full charging order was set for 26th January 2010. I kept chasing the Court regarding the current position regarding our application for a Variation of the Original order and was finally advised that it had been passed to a judge for determination on 16th December, and would be dealt with at the same hearing. Also submitted to the Court my written objections as to why the Final Chaging order should not be granted (obtained acceptable reasons from helpful Forums on this Site -thanks!). Attended hearing on 26th January. RCI's representative advised us that if we were successful in preventing the Final order being registered, the Interim order would remain in force, as "a judge does not have the power to remove this", and he had instructions from RCI to lodge an appeal, which would mean further delays, additional costs, and attending a further hearing. When we eventually got in front of the Judge, she discovered she did not have our file. The RCI representative handed her a copy of the Interim Charging Order, but NOT a copy of my objections which he also had. The judge quickly browsed the copy order, and granted the Final order. When I asked the judge if I could speak on behalf of my wife she refused, saying that the hearing was only scheduled for 5 minutes. So much for Justice!!I still have not yet received a notice of determination for my application for a Variation of the original order over 4 months after it was submitted to the Court.!

I'm therefore taking the while matter the the Financial Ombudsman Service (I note from recent statistics that they upheld over 50% of complaints made against RCI), and I'll throw in a complaint to the FSA to boot under their Teating Customers Fairly edict.

When I was sorting out the paperwork for my complaint to the FOS, I noticed that the default notice originally issed by RCI as far back as September 2008 referred to an agreement dated 12 March 2008, whereas the agreement was actually dated 3rd March 2008. Does this make the Default notice invalid? If so,does this mean that everything that happened subsequently should not have taken place? I really hope somone out there has some good news regarding this. Thanks in advance guys!