Welcome Finance - Hp - Ucan car ***WON***

[dx100uk]

post it as a pdf

 

convert them to a PDF [many website that will do that for you}

then at the bottom of our msg box

hit advanced

go down

manage attachments

 

upload them

 

then it will appear as an att in your msg

 

dx

[Tedstyler]

try these

[/url]

Edited April 14, 2010 by Tedstyler
new links placed

[Tedstyler]

Can anyone help or advise me on what I can do?

[dx100uk]

you have left pers data on atleast the first two pages

 

dx

[Tedstyler]

All personal data removed.

 

https://acrobat.com/#d=97At0HI0BPlKqb5vBlIEqg

https://acrobat.com/#d=ctuYDn9Fgjs3nVYFB3HZBw

https://acrobat.com/#d=hocL*esHzx0xED94svRlyA

https://acrobat.com/#d=rk9CJQzfngeEJZGDbPFSxw

 

Any advice anyone can offer would be much appreciated as I dont want to spending the rest of my life paying this off.

[dx100uk]

here its easier to read in one pdf!!

 

 

 

dx

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

Hello, originally I read your thread and I was appalled at what Welcome have done to you and your family and your situation had remained in my thoughts. I think I have stumbled across something that may well help you out but I really need to know some more details.

 

When did you take out the modified agreement?

How much had you paid off your first agreement before the rewrite?

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

Sorry, just re-read your thread and answered my own questions!!

From what I have just read I have extremely good reason to believe that what Welcome have done here is illegal repossession under section 90 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

Unless I'm grossly mistaken here, you are entitled to all your payments back, the car, release from liability and interest.

 

Please, please come back to your thread soon!! All is not lost!!

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

I've got a lot on with my own court battle with Welcome at the mo but I'm so troubled by this thread. Please Ted come back!! Is there any way somebody could get Ted to come back?????!

 

The facts are, (and I've had it confirmed, out of the mouths of the **** themselves), YOU HAVE PAID YOUR THIRD, THE GOODS WERE PROTECTED, THIS WAS AN ILLEGAL REPO OF PROTECTED GOODS!!!!!!!

 

In the event that Ted never comes back but somebody else reads this that is in a similar position I'd like to just show what the situation is.

 

90 Retaking of protected hire-purchase etc goods

 

(1) At any time when—

 

(a) the debtor is in breach of a regulated hire-purchase or a regulated conditional sale agreement relating to goods, and

 

(b) the debtor has paid to the creditor one-third or more of the total price of the goods, and

 

© the property in the goods remains in the creditor,

 

 

the creditor is not entitled to recover possession of the goods from the debtor except on an order of the court.

 

(2) Where under a hire-purchase or conditional sale agreement the creditor is required to carry out any installation and the agreement specifies, as part of the total price, the amount to be paid in respect of the installation (the “installation charge”) the reference in subsection (1)(b) to one third of the total price shall be construed as a reference to the aggregate of the installation charge and one third of the remainder of the total price.

 

(3) In a case where—

 

(a) subsection (1)(a) is satisfied, but not subsection (1)(b), and

 

(b) subsection (1)(b) was satisfied on a previous occasion in relation to an earlier agreement, being a regulated hire-purchase or regulated conditional sale agreement, between the same parties, and relating to any of the goods comprised in the later agreement (whether or not other goods were also included),

 

 

subsection (1) shall apply to the later agreement with the omission of paragraph (b).

 

(4) If the later agreement is a modifying agreement, subsection (3) shall apply with the substitution, for the second reference to the later agreement, of a reference to the modifying agreement.

 

(5) Subsection (1) shall not apply, or shall cease to apply, to an agreement if the debtor has terminated, or terminates, the agreement.

 

The part in red is the part that is very valid here.

 

It is basically saying that if you had paid a third in your first agreement and then the agreement was modified, (a re-write), but you did not change the car, (i.e. both the first agreement and the re-write were for the same car), then the third issue becomes irrelevant in the re-write as long as the agreement was terminated by them and not you. The car is "protected", they cannot take it without a court order and the consequences of them doing this are also clearly outlined.

 

(7) Goods falling within this section are in this Act referred to as “protected goods”.

 

91 Consequences of breach of s 90

 

If goods are recovered by the creditor in contravention of section 90—

 

(a) the regulated agreement, if not previously terminated, shall terminate, and

 

(b) the debtor shall be released from all liability under the agreement, and shall be entitled to recover from the creditor all sums paid by the debtor under the agreement.

 

I read this part of the Act many times in preparation for my own case but didn't quite get that part, so I read it and read it until I did!!!

 

I have received a copy of Welcome's defence in response to my claim and in one of their points they have conveniently verified this for us

 

"The defendant, (Welcome), will further say that the claimant has not paid more than one third of the total amount payable under either the first or second agreement. Consequently the vehicle was not protected"

 

Pay special attention to the highlighted word above

 

Come back Ted, you've won!!!!!

 

Wannabe x

[beyondhope]

I've got a lot on with my own court battle with Welcome at the mo but I'm so troubled by this thread. Please Ted come back!! Is there any way somebody could get Ted to come back?????!

 

The facts are, (and I've had it confirmed, out of the mouths of the **** themselves), YOU HAVE PAID YOUR THIRD, THE GOODS WERE PROTECTED, THIS WAS AN ILLEGAL REPO OF PROTECTED GOODS!!!!!!!

 

In the event that Ted never comes back but somebody else reads this that is in a similar position I'd like to just show what the situation is.

 

90 Retaking of protected hire-purchase etc goods

 

(1) At any time when—

 

(a) the debtor is in breach of a regulated hire-purchase or a regulated conditional sale agreement relating to goods, and

 

(b) the debtor has paid to the creditor one-third or more of the total price of the goods, and

 

© the property in the goods remains in the creditor,

 

 

the creditor is not entitled to recover possession of the goods from the debtor except on an order of the court.

 

(2) Where under a hire-purchase or conditional sale agreement the creditor is required to carry out any installation and the agreement specifies, as part of the total price, the amount to be paid in respect of the installation (the “installation charge”) the reference in subsection (1)(b) to one third of the total price shall be construed as a reference to the aggregate of the installation charge and one third of the remainder of the total price.

 

(3) In a case where—

 

(a) subsection (1)(a) is satisfied, but not subsection (1)(b), and

 

(b) subsection (1)(b) was satisfied on a previous occasion in relation to an earlier agreement, being a regulated hire-purchase or regulated conditional sale agreement, between the same parties, and relating to any of the goods comprised in the later agreement (whether or not other goods were also included),

 

 

subsection (1) shall apply to the later agreement with the omission of paragraph (b).

 

(4) If the later agreement is a modifying agreement, subsection (3) shall apply with the substitution, for the second reference to the later agreement, of a reference to the modifying agreement.

 

(5) Subsection (1) shall not apply, or shall cease to apply, to an agreement if the debtor has terminated, or terminates, the agreement.

 

The part in red is the part that is very valid here.

 

It is basically saying that if you had paid a third in your first agreement and then the agreement was modified, (a re-write), but you did not change the car, (i.e. both the first agreement and the re-write were for the same car), then the third issue becomes irrelevant in the re-write as long as the agreement was terminated by them and not you. The car is "protected", they cannot take it without a court order and the consequences of them doing this are also clearly outlined.

 

(7) Goods falling within this section are in this Act referred to as “protected goods”.

 

91 Consequences of breach of s 90

 

If goods are recovered by the creditor in contravention of section 90—

 

(a) the regulated agreement, if not previously terminated, shall terminate, and

 

(b) the debtor shall be released from all liability under the agreement, and shall be entitled to recover from the creditor all sums paid by the debtor under the agreement.

 

I read this part of the Act many times in preparation for my own case but didn't quite get that part, so I read it and read it until I did!!!

 

I have received a copy of Welcome's defence in response to my claim and in one of their points they have conveniently verified this for us

 

"The defendant, (Welcome), will further say that the claimant has not paid more than one third of the total amount payable under either the first or second agreement. Consequently the vehicle was not protected"

 

Pay special attention to the highlighted word above

 

Come back Ted, you've won!!!!!

 

Wannabe x

 

 

Wholeheartedly agree!!

[Tedstyler]

just seen the post, will sit down and read it properly when i get back in. Thankyou very much, it seems there is some hope for me.

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

just seen the post, will sit down and read it properly when i get back in. Thankyou very much, it seems there is some hope for me.

You've made me so happy! I even started a new thread to get you back

You've got a cast iron case my friend

[Tedstyler]

Thankyou once again. I guess the battle starts here. Just need to get together a very well worded together, which any help would be much appreiciated. I can post any progress i get.

Could really do with some good news now

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

Thankyou once again. I guess the battle starts here. Just need to get together a very well worded together, which any help would be much appreiciated. I can post any progress i get.

Could really do with some good news now

It's all good mate!

I'm always around, if you need help with anything I'd be more than happy to oblige

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

P.S. It's going to somewhat of a one-sided battle so don't worry too much

[beyondhope]

I agree with all wannabe has said and im also around alot so if i can help just shout Good luck not that you need it as wannabe says pretty one sided arguement here

[Marky2211]

Hi all,

 

I've been reading the CAG forums for a while now and one thing that has always got me thinking is the following.

 

I have noticed quite a few instances with people having difficulty regarding welcome finance that a member on this site called "postggj" offers very good sound and initial advice whilst also taking an active interest in helping the OP's out. I must mention the fact that yes I do recognise other posters on here who then try and help out in any way they can.

 

However I have noticed on many occasions that postggj rarely see's this through to the end and goes missing after helping the OP's out, they are then left high and dry trying to resolve their problems with welcome.

 

I was just wondering if anyone can shed any light on this, I don't mean this to be a dig at postggj in any way, but I have been curious for months as to why he dissapears, after initially agreeing to help the OP's out.

 

If postggj reads this then please understand that I'm not dissing you in any way, just curious as to what the reasons are?

[dx100uk]

if you use the search in our blue bar above for the users msgs.

you will see sadly that post has suffer re-occuring knee trouble which has meant many operations recently

 

dx

[BEBOBEBO]

Postggi has been quite active lately on the CAG, just doesn't seem to come on the welcome board anymore

[Tedstyler]

ok, so where to start?

Do i just write to them making demands?

if so whats are my entitlements?

should I quote the legal outlines posted?

 

I'm sorry for all the questions but i will pick it up as we go along.

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

ok, so where to start?

Do i just write to them making demands?

if so whats are my entitlements?

should I quote the legal outlines posted?

 

I'm sorry for all the questions but i will pick it up as we go along.

Hello!

Firstly I'd just like to forewarn you that it is likely you will have to enter a court claim in the end to get Welcome to pay you what they owe you. There will be the court fees to pay unless you qualify for fee remission, for the amount you will be claiming it will be either £225 or £360 depending on the amount. If you are on certain benefits or a low income you may qualify for having all or part of them paid for you. If you don't, you will be able to claim them back from Welcome when you win

 

If you would still like to go ahead the procedure will be as follows:

Write a letter to Welcome stating that you believe they have repossessed protected goods and you want them to rectify it. This will be a letter before action and you give them a specific time limit in which to reply, if they don't reply or try to fob you off you file a claim.

 

Your letter should say that they have breached section 90, you want the car back, (or value of), all payments made to them returned, release from any further liability and interest at 8%.

 

If they don't give you this within 14 days you will file a claim.

 

By law your are entitled to all the payments you ever made to them back, your car back, (or value of), release from all further liability

and interest.

 

Welcome will try to bluff and bully you all the way but the law is on your side, it's just a case of how far you will need to push them before they eventually give in.

 

It's your call, if you think you're up to the fight I'm with you all the way and I'm sure many other caggers will be too. Just say the word

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

Have a read of this, it'll tell you if you have to pay court fees or not.

 

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/ex160a_web_0709.pdf

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

You should also have received a copy of your first agreement in your subject access request. Please look at it and check that the figure stated in the "repossession your rights" section as being a third, is less than the total amount you paid on this agreement before the rewrite.

I know you said you'd paid over half but I'd still like you to double check just to be sure. Scan and post it up if poss. This is the agreement you will be relying on in court.

 

Wannabe x

[Tedstyler]

isnt there a limit as to how much you can claim in the small claims court? the car was worth £6260 when we bought it, we paid to Welcome on the first loan nearly £6,000 and 8% on top of that ..... ??

[Tedstyler]

on the first agreement the "repossession your rights" section figure is £3820.85 and at the date of taking out the replacement loan, we had paid them £5774.22