Welcome Finance - Agreement in dispute, now they want me to catch up on payments

[Sixx526]

Hi All,

 

Welcome Finance, with whom I've had a secured loan since 2007 (I was desperate at the time and clearly lacked good judgement), failed to send my CCA after I requested it. I sent them a 12+2 letter which they have acknowledged receipt of (verbally and by cashing my £1 cheque). As a consequence, I did not pay my installment at the end of June '11 due to the account being 'in dispute'.

 

They called me yesterday saying they are posting my CCA today but that once received I would need to make up the payment I missed due to the account being in dispute. My query(s), therefore, is:

1. Are they legally entitled to now request this missed payment (i.e. do I need to double up my payments this month) or are they chancing their arm? In other words, if I don't pay June's installment will I then be in default?

2. If not, is there a letter I can send to advise of the illegitimate claim for me to catch up these payments?

3. Where only the CCA is sent, and not a payment schedule/ statement, etc., would the account still be in dispute as the full requirement has not been met?

4. What are suggestions for next steps?

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not looking to shirk from my responsibilities and commitments, but I am loathe to give these crooks a penny more than I have to... Any help would be most appreciated! Thanks in advance. S

Edited July 6, 2011 by Sixx526

[rebel11]

Hi six

 

Welcome to CAG

 

The guys will be happy to advise as soon as they are available.

 

Thread moved.

[Sixx526]

Hi, Could you advise where the thread has been moved to? Sorry, new to the forum, adn still finding my way around... Thanks, Sixx

[steven4064]

1. Are they legally entitled to now request this missed payment (i.e. do I need to double up my payments this month) or are they chancing their arm? In other words, if I don't pay June's installment will I then be in default?

I don't think they are entitled. In any case, you will only be one payment 'behind' - they are not going to issue a default for that if you carry on paying

 

2. If not, is there a letter I can send to advise of the illegitimate claim for me to catch up these payments?

There isn't a letter but you could just write, in plain English, and point out that s77 of the CCA 1974 says that they may not demand payments whilst the account is in dispute and that means they cannot demand back payments one the account is no longer in dispute.

 

3. Where only the CCA is sent, and not a payment schedule/ statement, etc., would the account still be in dispute as the full requirement has not been met?

Technically, yes as s77 says they must supply the agreement and a statement of account

 

4. What are suggestions for next steps?

I would write a letter as in point 2 with the additional bit about the statement of account.

 

Here is an outline of a letter you could send:

 

1. You wrote on such a date under s77 CCA 1974

2. They have only partly complied

3. THe account is therefore still in dispute

4. Whilst it is in dispute they may not ask for payment

5. You will resume payments once they have complied

 

I have a further question - did you take out PPI or other insurance with the loan?

[Sixx526]

Thanks Steven, that's really helpful. Can't tell you what a relief it is to get some good (experience-based) advice here! I have tried a number of government helplines to get the same but after means testing it seems I don't qualify (go figure). Will keep you (all) posted on developments. I may need to upload the agreement for further advice, assuming, of course, it arrives. Am kicking myself, though, as I did sign my letters (rather than printed my name), but we are all learning, aren't we. Best wishes, Sixx

[steven4064]

Sixx

 

Things have changed since some earlier advice on this site - IMHO, the thing about signing letters is far less important now since courts have ruled that reconstituted agreements are enforceable. reconstituted agreements don't need a signature at all.

 

I have seen a number of Welcome agreements and they all comply with the 1983 regulations so there is no doubt about their enforceability, particularly since the recent rulings.

 

What are you hoping to achieve?

 

Plus, you didn't answer my question about insurance

[Sixx526]

Hi Steven, On the one hand, I'm not sure if PPI is on the agreement, so I would like to ensure I have this confirmation. When you say reconstitued, what exactly is this? Are you saying that a true copy of an agreement need not even have my signature as proof that I signed that particular version? If so, how do I prove it is in fact (or is not) the original agreement? On the other hand I would like to get clarity on the charges I have incurred since the agreement went live. Regards, Sixx

[steven4064]

Over the last year or so, the law has been clarified regarding agreements. As things stand, a loan company can provide (and enforce) an agreement recreated from their records. In other words, they do not have to provide a copy, they do not have to provide anything with your signature. All they have to do is to provide a document which has the prescribed terms relating to your agreement (theta, is what is meant by a 'true copy')as they WOULD HAVE BEEN when you signed it and AS THEY ARE NOW. If you acknowledge that you actually borrowed money from them, this is all they need to enforce the agreement through the courts.

 

If you deny that you ever borrowed any money, that is a different matter, although, if they can show that, on the balance of probabilities, it is likely that you did borrow the money, then the agreement will be enforced.

 

The 'true copy' must show if there is PPI, etc.

[RoyalIrish]

If this is now the case, what is the point of all the advice given on this forum advising people to send off CCA requests?

 

Acording to this it is nothing but a waste of time, paper and £1.

 

If the debt doesn't need to be substantiated with a signature on an original 'agreement' etc. then a DCA has quite literally 'carte blanch' to demand what they want from whomever they want by simply producing a document made up from any rubbish that they desire.

 

The poor induvidual has absolutely no protection whatsoever!

 

I am totally shocked by this and quite frankly I am at a loss because we have now got no protection at all from DCA's.

 

Personally I would rather go bankrupt than pay these bottom feeders a penny and if it ever comes to it I will quite happily go down this route and 'wipe the slate clean'.

 

I actually regret not doing this 6 years ago!

 

RI

[Sixx526]

Hi,

 

Have now received my CCA's. I took out the loan for £20k in '07 (£3,774 PPI/ Insurance included makes the total £23,774), the CCA for which is present in their letter. I re-signed in '08 due to losing my job and 'so they could 'give me lower monthly payments.

 

The second agreement is for £22,203, even though it quite clearly states that I have declined PPI.

 

So, there seems to be a discrepency as I did not receive an additional £2,203. It may have been from the original PPI that was included with the first agreement, but considering I declined the PPI surely the amount should be (at the most) £20,000? What do you (or anybody) think of my options? How do I address this discrepency?

 

Also, no statement of my account was included. I guess I should write a letter stating the dispute is still ongoing as my request is incompletely satisfied. Any ideas regarding the wording?

 

Finally, how long do I have to reply before the dispute is considered resolved? If I have to re-send letters, I don't want to waster any time, and expose myself to any defaults...

 

Again, my sincerest thanks to you all for looking and contributing.

 

Thanks Guys

 

Sixx

[twoman]

RI,

Excellent point raised.

So what is the response to RI statement,are we stuffed or not?

[steven4064]

If this is now the case, what is the point of all the advice given on this forum advising people to send off CCA requests?

 

Acording to this it is nothing but a waste of time, paper and £1.

 

If the debt doesn't need to be substantiated with a signature on an original 'agreement' etc. then a DCA has quite literally 'carte blanch' to demand what they want from whomever they want by simply producing a document made up from any rubbish that they desire.

 

The poor induvidual has absolutely no protection whatsoever!

 

I am totally shocked by this and quite frankly I am at a loss because we have now got no protection at all from DCA's.

 

Personally I would rather go bankrupt than pay these bottom feeders a penny and if it ever comes to it I will quite happily go down this route and 'wipe the slate clean'.

 

I actually regret not doing this 6 years ago!

 

RI

A lot of the advice about sending off for CCA's, etc dates back before the cases I referred to. What people need to realise is that the world has completely changed over the last 18 months in relation to consumer credit agreements.

 

Basically, what the courts have said is that if you admit to borrowing money and the lender can show you under what terms you borrowed it, then that is all that is necessary for the agreement to be enforced. If you insist that you didn't borrow the money, the court will find on the basis of balance of probabilities. So, if you actually didn't borrow the money (for example, the creditor is chasing the wrong person), you can insist that they prove it (and they shouldn't be able to, of course) - that is your protection against DCAs. To insist that you didn't borrow the money when you in fact did, would be fraud.

 

I think there is a slight misconception in what you posted. Asking for a CCA under sections 77 or 78 of the Act never really was a "protection against DCAs" in the sense that it never was a legitimate thing to do to try and get out of paying a debt on the technical ground that the DCA couldn't produce an agreement- although many tried it. CAG never encouraged it or supported it.

[steven4064]

Hi,

 

Have now received my CCA's. I took out the loan for £20k in '07 (£3,774 PPI/ Insurance included makes the total £23,774), the CCA for which is present in their letter. I re-signed in '08 due to losing my job and 'so they could 'give me lower monthly payments.

 

The second agreement is for £22,203, even though it quite clearly states that I have declined PPI.

 

So, there seems to be a discrepency as I did not receive an additional £2,203. It may have been from the original PPI that was included with the first agreement, but considering I declined the PPI surely the amount should be (at the most) £20,000? What do you (or anybody) think of my options? How do I address this discrepency?

 

Also, no statement of my account was included. I guess I should write a letter stating the dispute is still ongoing as my request is incompletely satisfied. Any ideas regarding the wording?

 

Finally, how long do I have to reply before the dispute is considered resolved? If I have to re-send letters, I don't want to waster any time, and expose myself to any defaults...

 

Again, my sincerest thanks to you all for looking and contributing.

 

Thanks Guys

 

Sixx

I had exactly this situation - you may have declined PPI on the refinanced loan, but the principal from the original PPI is still clearly in the loan amount. What they did was to

calculate the early repayment amount of the original loan and then sell you a second loan to pay it off, including the original PPI amount.

 

What you should do is to put in a claim for repayment of the PPI payments you have made in both the original and refinanced loans, plus interest. Write to them and tell them that the PPI was mis-sold and that you want it back. I can calculate the amount but I will need the following information:

 

Date of first loan, monthly repayment amount, number of months of the original loan, date when it was refinanced, date of second loan (if different from date when first loan was refinanced), monthly repayments for second loan, number of months of second loan

[Sixx526]

Morning Steven, Thanks for your reply. The first agreement was April 2007, 120 month term, and £425 per month. The second was in April 2008 over 300 months, and £239 payments per month. The information I requested is incomplete (in my CCA request) as the statement was absent. Am I correct in assuming that this account is still, therefore, in dispute? Also, I never wanted to 'get out of the loan', rather to gain clarity on the status and the PPI issue. Not sure if your previous statement ("Asking for a CCA under sections 77 or 78 of the Act never really was a "protection against DCAs" in the sense that it never was a legitimate thing to do to try and get out of paying a debt on the technical ground that the DCA couldn't produce an agreement- although many tried it. CAG never encouraged it or supported it") was directed at me? Thanks, Sixx

[Sixx526]

Sorry, I see you responded to my statement of account query earlier - please disregard.

[steven4064]

Morning Steven, Thanks for your reply. The first agreement was April 2007, 120 month term, and £425 per month. The second was in April 2008 over 300 months, and £239 payments per month. The information I requested is incomplete (in my CCA request) as the statement was absent. Am I correct in assuming that this account is still, therefore, in dispute? Also, I never wanted to 'get out of the loan', rather to gain clarity on the status and the PPI issue. Not sure if your previous statement ("Asking for a CCA under sections 77 or 78 of the Act never really was a "protection against DCAs" in the sense that it never was a legitimate thing to do to try and get out of paying a debt on the technical ground that the DCA couldn't produce an agreement- although many tried it. CAG never encouraged it or supported it") was directed at me? Thanks, Sixx

Thanks for the info. To do the sums, I also need the dates - when the first loan was taken out and when it was refinanced. I need this to work out the statutory rebate.

 

I was not accusing you of trying to get out of the loan - my comments were not directed at you at all but were general, prompted by RI's post, trying to lay out the situation as it now is (and to some extent, why)

[Sixx526]

Thanks, Steven, Appreciated. I thought as much (re: RI's post) but just wanted to confirm. Regards, Sixx

[Sixx526]

First loan: 4 April 2007, refinance: April 2008.

[Sixx526]

First loan: 4 April 2007, refinance: April 2008.

[twoman]

Just a point on the reconstituted agreements,

If they the banks/dca's can not produce the original agreements how can they reconstitute an agreement as they would not know what was originally signed.

Also as Welcome have done HFC were good at giving a loan then getting you to take another 12 months later to pay off an existing and increasing payment periods/amounts.

About to send lba this week on reclaims and will be watching this post with interest..good luck sixx526.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

What they produce looks nothing like an agreement I have one in front of me now

from a DCA much feature on CAG. not going to name them as they are known

to trawl the forums.

 

Page1 has the usual CCA notice, the name of the OC and their address.

below this is the name and address of the debtor the rest 30 pages of original and varied T's & C's.

this was supplied with statements from the OC.

 

The DCA' states the have complied (their words) EXACTLY with the requirements of the act PAY UP.

 

I took advice from a higher authority on this one, and took the case to mediation wit an excellent

result for the debtor, who had only this one problem debt (lucky girl).

 

And of course with a Tomlin order no CCJ is recorded.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

What they produce looks nothing like an agreement I have one in front of me now

from a DCA much feature on CAG. not going to name them as they are known

to trawl the forums.

 

Page1 has the usual CCA notice, the name of the OC and their address.

below this is the name and address of the debtor the rest 30 pages of original and varied T's & C's.

this was supplied with statements from the OC.

 

The DCA' states the have complied (their words) EXACTLY with the requirements of the act PAY UP.

 

I took advice from a higher authority on this one, and took the case to mediation wit an excellent

result for the debtor, who had only this one problem debt (lucky girl).

 

And of course with a Tomlin order no CCJ is recorded.

[RoyalIrish]

I really don't think that they care!

 

From what I gather if you are being chased by a DCA then there is practically nothing that you can do about it.

 

Far from DEBT AVOIDANCE as mentioned earlier in this thread most people like me have been using the CCA method to get a bit of breathing space and to stop relentless harrassment from DCA's.

 

If you are unable to pay your debts simply because you cannot afford to due to a change in circumstances then how on earth are you supposed to survive?

 

I cannot see Lowell's or some of the other bottom feeders accepting this as reason not to pay them what they ask!

 

It would seem that if you now fall on hard times and cannot repay your borrowings then DCA's can hound you to your grave!

 

There is no legal way to get them to back off, they are literally able to ask for whatever they want and if you cannot please them it's a court appearance to look forward to!

 

In my opinion it is utter nonsense and the DCA's must by laughing all the way to the bank.

 

It's disgraceful that you now have to prove that you don't owe money rather than the DCA having to prove that you do.

 

The country has gone absolutely mental and as usual it's the poor that have to suffer for it.

 

I give up!

 

RI

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Have to agree until the despicable debt collection industry is reformed and properly regulated, nothing will

change, the allowance of debt collection searches is one of the most despicable acts now condoned

by the''regulators''.

[steven4064]

Just a point on the reconstituted agreements,

If they the banks/dca's can not produce the original agreements how can they reconstitute an agreement as they would not know what was originally signed.

They keep a blank original and then just fill it in in response to the s77 request with details from their database.