Yes Car Credit & Go Debt

[RiQ123]

this is important

 

was it a mr stuart barns you spoke to

 

yes or no

 

Yes, but it took a bit of persuasion to be put through to him.

[RiQ123]

Just received a letter in the post this morning confirming that they're prepared to accept the full amount in full and final settlement!

 

Well that's an offer I can't refuse, lol.

[RiQ123]

Received yet another letter in the post today simply saying "Please call us on xxxx xxxxx immediately to discuss your debt".

[RiQ123]

Is everything going ok postggj; is there anything else you need from me?

[RiQ123]

I've read somewhere that my signature needs to be on the same page as all the financial details; is this correct? (mine is on a different page)

 

If so can someone direct me to some text that confirms it as I don't think putting "because I read it somewhere" would look too good as part of my defence

[Earth123]

Hello,

 

I took out a car with Yes Car Credit in 2004, I made a few payments to the car and I also paid a deposit of £280. I gave the car back in May 2005.

 

This where the problem comes in, They have been phoning me demanding me to pay £8995 and at the time I never had any money, They said to me pay £1000 and thats it, I said to them O.K no problem I am getting my pension money and i'll pay you.

 

A few days pass and they call again saying you are paying £5750 because you are getting a pension of £10,000, they blocked my payment from the pension company and they also sent sheriff's to my work.

 

I had no choice to say no to them, they took 57.5% of my pension.

 

I really really want the money back because I was planning a holiday because i have almost died with a blood clot but now I can't go because of Go-Debt, I worked really hard all my life just to lose my pension money in the matter of 2 minutes.

 

Can anyone help?

 

 

 

 

Thank you

Edited February 9, 2010 by MARTIN3030
Rem as req

[debt4get]

how the hell did they get their hands on your pension? have they already got a judgement in court? is so, we are going to have to get this set aside first. i suggest you start your own thread so you can get the help you need..

what a terrible story.. i know that the agreement that yes car had is absolute bog roll and can and has been successfully defended in court, but we are going to need to know if there is a court judgement in effect

[Earth123]

Hello again,

 

Thank you for your help, I have all the agreements right beside me. I never went to court over this debt, never stood in front of a judge but what i believe was sheriff officers came to my work with a statutory demand for payment of debt which wasn't even stamped and they said i had three weeks to denied it but i never had chance as they took the money straight away. They also sent a email to my financial advisor, which i still have a copy.

 

I don't know how to start a new thread, but i really appriciate your help

 

thank you

Earth123

Edited February 9, 2010 by MARTIN3030

[RiQ123]

Click on the button below and it'll create a new thread for you..

 

 

Hopefully we can all help to get this injustice sorted out.

[Earth123]

thank you the new thread is up, i've called it Penison money gone, yes car credit & go debt

[RiQ123]

postggj was helping me out with this but hasn't logged in for a week so I need to try and get this done myself by Friday with a little help from others if possible; here is what I have got so far thanks to debt4get who is helping out someone with a similar issue...

 

--------

 

1. The Defendant had a credit agreement XXXXXX ("the Agreement") with the Claimant which was opened on or around xxxxxx and closed on or around xxxxxx.

 

2. On xxxxxx the Defendant made a formal request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA1974) s.77-s.79 for a true copy of the regulated agreement referred to in the above account number and the Claimant has failed to comply with the Defendants’ statutory request and has defaulted in respect of this account. On xxxxxx the Claimant provided part of the agreement but supplied with it a later version of the terms and conditions and not the terms and conditions that were in force at the time of the agreement.

a) The Claimant has therefore failed to comply with section 77(1) of the CCA and the Claimant is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement as stated in section 77 (4)(a) of the CCA

b) The default has continued for more than one month and the Claimant has committed an offence as stated in section 77 (4)(b) of the CCA.

 

3. At the time of undertaking the credit agreement, the agent acting on behalf of the Claimant misled the Defendant into procuring Payment Protection Insurance ("the Insurance") as part of the overall credit bargain.

 

4. The Defendant contends that:

 

a) Under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 the Defendant was misled and false information was given during the interview process on the day the agreement was made;

i) The Insurances sold to the Defendant were not defined nor explained and were not "optional" as laid out in the said agreement, they were not accepted. The Claimants agent misrepresented the fact that the insurance was compulsory, due to desperate times of the Defendant; the Defendant felt that there was no choice but to agree to the credit bargain.

ii) The Insurance was mis-sold, and the deposit for the vehicle was actually used against the price of the insurance not the vehicle.

 

a) The Defendant further contends that if the Insurance was applied correctly, that the Agreement was not executed in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974;

b) As the Insurance was in fact a charge for credit on the Conditional Sale Agreement, it could not also be part of the credit on the additional insurances agreement as under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit even where time is given for their payments

ii) If the Insurance was not a charge for credit in respect of the Conditional Sale Agreement, as it was compulsory, it was a charge for credit on the additional insurances and under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit

iii) For the reasons stated in either (i) or (ii) above, the agreement for additional insurances failed to state the correct amount of credit and did not comply with paragraph 2, schedule 6, which requires that regulated agreements contain as a prescribed term stating the correct amount of credit

iv) The agreement for additional insurances was therefore improperly executed under section 61 (1)(a) of the CCA.

--------

 

I also want to make a comment about the prescribed information being on a different page to my signature as I believe that this would also make the agreement uneforceable, but I'm not very good with words.

 

Can someone help me out or point me in the direction?

[debt4get]

the defendant further contends that the agreement is unenforceable in law as the prescribed terms do not fall within the 4 corners of the signed agreement.

 

will try to find the points of law for you and post it in later, unless anyone else can word this differently/better

[RiQ123]

the defendant further contends that the agreement is unenforceable in law as the prescribed terms do not fall within the 4 corners of the signed agreement.

 

will try to find the points of law for you and post it in later, unless anyone else can word this differently/better

 

Thanks, that's exactly what I'm trying to say but I'm not very good with words, especially legal jargon!

[debt4get]

does this read better?

 

the Defendant further contends that the agreement is unenforceable as the prescribed terms for the purposes of section 61(1)(0) and 127(3) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 must be included within the body of the document which they clearly do not(see attached)

[debt4get]

the see attached will have to be document they sent you included in your evidence so you will have to number it e.g. see document 1

[RiQ123]

the see attached will have to be document they sent you included in your evidence so you will have to number it e.g. see document 1

 

So I need to attach the following to my statement (all stapled together):

 

1. Stat Demand (3 pages)

2. Credit Agreement (3 pages)

 

Do I number each document by writing the relevant number in the top right corner of each page or is there a more official way of doing it?

[debt4get]

yeah would think that is absolutely fine, dont believe there is an official way as such, its just refer to document so and so, page so and so etc

[debt4get]

1. The conditional sale agreement (car side of contract) is unenforceable as it lacks a prescribed term.

 

2. The liablity of voluntary termination (half way stage) is incorrect as this deposit should have been removed from the car credit and not the insurances.

 

3. The agreement is improperly executed under S61 (1) (a) of the Consumer Credit Act and S127 (3).

 

you can also add these to your defence if you like

[debt4get]

sorry no.1 we have already dealt with

no.2 we can use, as the figures quoted would be incorrect as the half way stage where you could hand the car back and incur no charges is not true

[RiQ123]

This is what I have so far (the new stuff is in blue at the end)...

 

---------

 

1. The Defendant had a credit agreement XXXXXX ("the Agreement") with the Claimant which was opened on or around xxxxxx and closed on or around xxxxxx.

 

 

2. On xxxxxx the Defendant made a formal request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA1974) s.77-s.79 for a true copy of the regulated agreement referred to in the above account number and the Claimant has failed to comply with the Defendants’ statutory request and has defaulted in respect of this account. On xxxxxx the Claimant provided part of the agreement but supplied with it a later version of the terms and conditions and not the terms and conditions that were in force at the time of the agreement.

a) The Claimant has therefore failed to comply with section 77(1) of the CCA and the Claimant is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement as stated in section 77 (4)(a) of the CCA

b) The default has continued for more than one month and the Claimant has committed an offence as stated in section 77 (4)(b) of the CCA.

 

3. At the time of undertaking the credit agreement, the agent acting on behalf of the Claimant misled the Defendant into procuring Payment Protection Insurance ("the Insurance") as part of the overall credit bargain.

 

4. The Defendant contends that:

 

a) Under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 the Defendant was misled and false information was given during the interview process on the day the agreement was made;

i) The Insurances sold to the Defendant were not defined nor explained and were not "optional" as laid out in the said agreement, they were not accepted. The Claimants agent misrepresented the fact that the insurance was compulsory, due to desperate times of the Defendant; the Defendant felt that there was no choice but to agree to the credit bargain.

ii) The Insurance was mis-sold, and the deposit for the vehicle was actually used against the price of the insurance not the vehicle.

 

a) The Defendant further contends that if the Insurance was applied correctly, that the Agreement was not executed in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974;

b) As the Insurance was in fact a charge for credit on the Conditional Sale Agreement, it could not also be part of the credit on the additional insurances agreement as under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit even where time is given for their payments

ii) If the Insurance was not a charge for credit in respect of the Conditional Sale Agreement, as it was compulsory, it was a charge for credit on the additional insurances and under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit

iii) For the reasons stated in either (i) or (ii) above, the agreement for additional insurances failed to state the correct amount of credit and did not comply with paragraph 2, schedule 6, which requires that regulated agreements contain as a prescribed term stating the correct amount of credit

iv) The agreement for additional insurances was therefore improperly executed under section 61 (1)(a) of the CCA.

 

5. The Defendant further contends that the agreement is unenforceable as the prescribed terms for the purposes of section 61(1)(a) and 127(3) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 must be included within the body of the document which they clearly do not (see attached)

 

6. the Defendant also contends that the agreement is further made unenforceable under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 as the liability of voluntary termination figure would be incorrect, as the deposit should have been removed from the vehicle credit and not the insurances, thus making the document invalid, and again the agreement improperly executed under S61 (1) (a) of the Consumer Credit Act

 

---------

 

I'll add in the document reference numbers when I've worked out what page they will be when it's all bound together

Edited February 9, 2010 by RiQ123

[debt4get]

6. the Defendant also contends that the agreement is further made unenforceable under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 as the liability of voluntary termination figure would be incorrect, as the deposit should have been removed from the vehicle credit and not the insurances, thus making the agreement improperly executed under S61 (1) (a) of the Consumer Credit Act

 

take out number 7 as put into 6

have another read through your defence as i have also noticed that you have used abbreviations such as cca, make sure that it reads consumer credit act, including the capital letters

[RiQ123]

6. the Defendant also contends that the agreement is further made unenforceable under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 as the liability of voluntary termination figure would be incorrect, as the deposit should have been removed from the vehicle credit and not the insurances, thus making the document invalid, and again the agreement improperly executed under S61 (1) (a) of the Consumer Credit Act

 

take out number 7 as put into 6

 

Thanks, I've updated it in my previous post.

 

I'm almost looking forward to handing it all in now, I'll probably skip up to the court! lol

[RiQ123]

Do I need to submit a form for expenses or is that when it goes to court?

[debt4get]

is this for set aside?

[debt4get]

just had another quick read and take it this is for the stat demand is that correct?