Cap1 & CCA return

[NWJ]

Hi there. How can the APR and the interest rate be the same?

[phatram]

No 2

 

 

KEY FINANCIAL INFO.

 

AMOUNT OF CREDIT £11831.00

 

No OF MONTHLY INSTALMENTS

84 PAYMENTS OF £177.00.

 

TOTAL PAYABLE £14868.00

 

APR 6.9%.

 

OTHER FINANCIAL INFO.

TOTAL CHARGE FOR CREDIT (INTEREST) £3037.00

(see clause 2.3 of t and c's)

 

THE INTEREST RATE 6.73% pa

[Number6]

The reason legal bods never give a straight answer is that there is never one to be given.

 

Or would you prefer they told you what you wanted to hear, regardless?

 

Sorry if that comes across as brutal but no two cases are the same and no two judges are the same either.

 

No, that's fine and to an extent I would agree with you. But such cases as Joan of Arc's seem to me, in my simplistic view, to be much of a muchness and pretty simple in essence; Lender provides illegible document + random T&C's, debtor claims documentation illegible, breaks Copies of Docs regs therefore inadmissible. Lender challenged to produce original, they say can't, we composted it but here's a random employee who will attest that it must have been so even though he hasn't a clue really.

 

In such a case any brief with any experience of these matters must be able to say a) this is probably a winnable case and b) there are only 1, 2, 3... arguments (insert correct number) that the lender can use. Therefore, say two hours preparation time and three hours in court, call it a grand + 50% for contingencies. There you go mr debtor, fixed fee of £1500 and I'll take the case on for you.

 

??

 

Pete

[Viscount Stair]

No, that's fine and to an extent I would agree with you. But such cases as Joan of Arc's seem to me, in my simplistic view, to be much of a muchness and pretty simple in essence; Lender provides illegible document + random T&C's, debtor claims documentation illegible, breaks Copies of Docs regs therefore inadmissible. Lender challenged to produce original, they say can't, we composted it but here's a random employee who will attest that it must have been so even though he hasn't a clue really.

 

In such a case any brief with any experience of these matters must be able to say a) this is probably a winnable case and b) there are only 1, 2, 3... arguments (insert correct number) that the lender can use. Therefore, say two hours preparation time and three hours in court, call it a grand + 50% for contingencies. There you go mr debtor, fixed fee of £1500 and I'll take the case on for you.

 

??

 

Pete

That is probably fair comment.

[NWJ]

If the claim is a fast track one dale trial - Counsel's fees are fixed - if they work on a CFA they are entitled to charge an uplift then

[Peterbard]

Hi

Personally

I would never now persue any claim for unenforceabilty on an agreement unless the prescribed terms were on the agreement and where incorrct so that you could prove them to be so with a pocket calulator.

 

All this other stuf i know about probably better than most on here and in my view if your main argument isn't the one above then you are scating on very thin ice.

 

Peter

[Peterbard]

KEY FINANCIAL INFO.

 

AMOUNT OF CREDIT £11831.00

 

No OF MONTHLY INSTALMENTS

84 PAYMENTS OF £177.00.

 

TOTAL PAYABLE £14868.00

 

APR 6.9%.

 

OTHER FINANCIAL INFO.

TOTAL CHARGE FOR CREDIT (INTEREST) £3037.00

(see clause 2.3 of t and c's)

 

THE INTEREST RATE 6.73% pa

 

HI

 

spot on i am affraid

[Peterbard]

LOAN AMOUNT £25000

TOTAL AMOUNT PAYABLE £35874

MONTHLY PAYMENT £298.95

 

APR IS 7.9%

 

Well spotted that man the interest rate should be 7.6%

 

APR is 7.943%

[NWJ]

then if they have quoted the wrong interest rate that is a breach of a prescribed term?

[phatram]

then if they have quoted the wrong interest rate that is a breach of a prescribed term?

 

And if it is, does it make it unenforceable?

Mrs P

[Peterbard]

Hi

No interest rate is not a prescribed term on a fixed sum agreementpre 2005, if it is dated after august 2005 then it is required to be on the agreement and would breech section 60 if it where incorrect.

 

Peter

[NWJ]

couldnt see the date on the agreement

[phatram]

And if it is, does it make it unenforceable?

Mrs P

Loan taken out in 2006

[Peterbard]

Hi

Then it would breach section 60.

The judge would decide on the amount of prdudice caused by the error as to wherther to enforce or alter the agreement.

The interst is not widle regarded as being predudicial to the linder ,most lenders go off the apr when making a purchasing decision.

If it were a large errer it may be worth a punt but as i said earlier i wouldn't.

 

Peter

[millymollymoo]

HI yes this is simmilar to the one i mentioned earlier on here.

 

I certainly feel for joan.i know exactly how she must be feeling. I have been there to often.

 

This is why we must make sure that our cases are watertight before we go to court every loss makes it harder for the next person.

 

Peter

 

 

Yes you have mentioned about cases being watertight and how easy you said for peeps to be shot down in flames.

 

I myself would not take on the BOS in court without a Barrister me thinks for sure. It would be worth the cost due to the size of the claim, it would def be Fast Track.

 

 

Milly XXX

[Peterbard]

Yes you have mentioned about cases being watertight and how easy you said for peeps to be shot down in flames.

 

I myself would not take on the BOS in court without a Barrister me thinks for sure. It would be worth the cost due to the size of the claim, it would def be Fast Track.

 

 

Milly XXX

 

Hi

 

Please don't go paying any up front fees to anyone get advice first.

Independant advice.

 

Peter

[NWJ]

Hi Peter.

 

I wasnt aware that any de-minimis can be applied to a prescribed term - you are either the right side of the regs or not - that right? - after all - the judge has no discretion under 127(3) when a prescribed term has been breached.

[NWJ]

Agree about the advice thing - but there are firms of lawyers and Chambers that will do cases on a CFA

[Peterbard]

diminimms isnt that a song from the seventies.

 

peter

[NWJ]

yep - followed the banks only number 1 - mouldy old dough!!

[Peterbard]

Agree about the advice thing - but there are firms of lawyers and Chambers that will do cases on a CFA

 

I know of many that say they do and i am sure that their are some that actually do i am just saying be careful

 

 

Peter

[millymollymoo]

 

Signatures

All agreements are to be signed by both customer and trader, or their representatives, and the date of signature entered. The customer’s signature and its date must be inside a box. This box can be of any size and appear anywhere in the agreement, but the wording inside it must be easily legible and must follow that for the appropriate type of agreement as set out in Appendix 2. The signature of the trader and its date must be outside the customer’s signature box. Similarly the signature of any witness, and its date, must also be outside the customer’s signature box.

 

 

Many thanks Peter, it is crystal now for old agreements and the sig!

 

Milly XX

 

 

 

 

 

Best regards

Peter

[Peterbard]

hI seiosly no the interst is not a prescribed term on a fixed sum credit agrement scedule 1 section 9 of the 1983/1553 statutory instrument look it up.

 

Peter

[millymollymoo]

sadly its true though, thats why the banks dont often back away from a LIP but they do back down a lot quicker when you have Bradley say or steven neville or steven turner etc in your corner

 

 

Absolutely agree and will not be taking on BOS on my own. I can see how easy it is to lose and I can see when you are up against a creditors barrister as I have read on here how traumatic it can be.

 

Milly XX

[questioning]

Yes you have mentioned about cases being watertight and how easy you said for peeps to be shot down in flames.

 

I myself would not take on the BOS in court without a Barrister me thinks for sure. It would be worth the cost due to the size of the claim, it would def be Fast Track.

 

 

Milly XXX

Very wise move.

I certainly wouldn't have a hope in hell in a court room. (I've never been to court, what about wearing some seductive clothing and winking at the judge, only joking he'd probably think I'd come off my local street corner and had an eye affliction)

I have seen Peter warn people off in different threads and it seems alot of folk just carry on regardless if they have a breech in the agreement they think they are gonna win.

some read stuff on here and plough ahead and end up in the s..t,

In Joans case I think they researched very well and presented their case very well too. I appreciate the fact that the latter of Joans thread gives a very good warning and I too feel sorry for her. She gave it a very good shot.

kind regards Q.x.