Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Which would require a hearing....so the fee would be £255.00
    • When providing a copy of an executed agreement in response to a request under section 78(1) of the Act:   a.     must a creditor provide a photocopy (or other form of complete copy) of the original agreement that was signed by the debtor or at least provide a copy which is derived directly from the original agreement or complete copy thereof? or b.     can a creditor provide a document which is a reconstitution of the original agreement which may be from sources other than the actual signed agreement itself?   It was held that a creditor can satisfy its duty under section 78 by providing a reconstituted version of the executed agreement which may be from sources other than the actual signed agreement itself.   The judge accepted that as a matter of law, section 78 does not itself require any particular explanation as to how the copy was made. However, as a matter of good practice and so as not to mislead the debtor, it is desirable that the creditor should explain that it is providing a reconstituted as opposed to a physical copy of the executed agreement. This will also explain why the copy might otherwise look a little odd. The creditor can also explain in the letter that this procedure is satisfactory under the Act. The judge also provided that the following information needs to be included in the reconstituted copy agreement (assuming of course that it was present in the original):   1.     Heading: Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 2.     Name and address of the debtor 3.     Name and address of the creditor 4.     Cancellation clause applicable to the executed agreement.   All of the above may be provided on a sheet which is separate from the full statement of terms and conditions which also forms part of the reconstituted agreement. The creditor may, however, decide to reconstitute the agreement in a different way so that, for example, the information above is populated electronically onto the same sheet as that which sets out the terms and conditions, or some of them. The judge stated that he did not intend to prescribe the precise form of the reconstituted agreement. The key point is what information it should contain, subject to the point that its format should not be such as to mislead the debtor as to what he agreed to.   The judge also considered whether a statement like the one appearing in the reconstructed application form in Carey referring to the agreement to the terms and conditions "attached" needs to be included in the reconstituted copy. Alternatively if the application form had said "I agree to the terms overleaf", should that statement be included. The judge held that this aspect of the form is not necessary for the purpose of the section 78 copy, although there is nothing to stop a bank from putting it in or indeed from furnishing a copy of the type of application form or signature page that the debtor would have signed, as some banks have done. The statement referring to terms and conditions is not itself prescribed information and the supply of the terms and conditions which were applicable at the time will tell the debtor what he needs to know in terms of the content of what he signed up to, including the presence (or otherwise) of the prescribed terms.   In practical terms what this is likely to mean is that if the creditor chooses to use as the section 78 copy the section 63 copy, which would have been provided to that particular debtor at the time following execution of the agreement, this will be sufficient provided that the information referred to above is supplied. This exercise is not a mere formality. The creditor will need to check carefully that the details of the debtor at the time are correct and that those are the particular terms (including prescribed terms) that he/she agreed to. This is to ensure that it is an honest and accurate copy.   Must a creditor provide a document which would comply (if signed) with the requirements of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (Regulations) as to form, as at the date the agreement was made in order to comply with section 78?   A creditor need not, in complying with section 78, provide a document which would comply (if signed) with the requirements of the Regulations as to form, as at the date the agreement was made.   Must the copy provided under section 78 include the debtor's name and address as at the date when the agreement was made, and if so in what form? The section 78 copy must contain the name and address of the debtor as it was at the time of the execution of the agreement. But the creditor can provide the name and address from whatever source it has of those details. It does not have to take them from the executed agreement itself.     If an agreement has been varied by the creditor under a unilateral power of variation, is a copy of the executed agreement as varied, a sufficient copy for the purposes of section 78(1), or must the creditor provide a copy of the original agreement as well?   If an agreement has been varied by the creditor under a unilateral power of variation, the creditor must still provide a copy of the original agreement, as well as the varied terms.     As your agreement is post April 2007  Section 61(1)(a) and 127(3)   Consumer Credit Act 1974 would not apply.   Andy
    • well start a new thread for the court claim.   as for this one i'd await the letter of claim  
    • Useful information...   And....   https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part55
    • nice and ofcourse totally unlawful.   £349.50 is the usual sum RLP try and fleece out of people under some silly civil threats none of goes to the store it all goes in RLP's pocket for their next staff holiday paid for by mugs that fall for their twaddle ignore!!
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2515 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi all I just need a bit of advice.

 

2 years ago I got behind with our car loan repayments, we went through a bad patch husband was nearly killed in a car accident & our son has a very serious heart condition. However upon attending court the the judge suspended the repossession on the basis we paid xxx amount each month until the balance was cleared.

 

Now our problem, our son recently had to go into hospital for a surgical procedure on his heart, this resulted in me taking a considerable amount of time off from work. Because of the lost income we have got behind by 2 months on our arrangement. My question is does the lender have to return to the court again to enforce the possession order, or can they just come and collect the vehicle? As my understanding is they have to return to court to enforce and a court bailiff carries out the repossession, which gives me time to suspend the possession again, is this correct?

 

To be fair we have in two years reduced the balance by more than half from £9000 to under £4000, so our intentions are to clear the balance. All we are asking for is the two missed months just be added onto the end, is that an unreasonable request? And how would that argument prop up in court as last time the judge did not want to repossess as the vehicle is registered disabled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is a suspended possession order on the vehicle the lender can apply to the court for a warrant to enforce possession whioch will involve a bailiff visiting to collect the vehicle (you should be advised in writing beforehand) - you would then need to apply to the court for a hearing to have the repossession stopped.


Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as I thought, I have no problem with attending court as I've just been there with our mortgage within the last 2 weeks and we got that sorted.

 

However we just keep getting letters from the client's solicitors that they are just coming for the car, we have wrote to them and have now continued payments but its like water off a ducks back to them.

 

Am I right in thinking that if they do what they say they are going to do without a court order and bailiff enforcement, I could technically request back all the monies paid as so far?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only person who can take your car is a court bailiff with a copy of the warrant in his hand. Write back to the solicitors telling them you have taken advice and understand that only a court bailiff can repossess your car therefore you will not be handing the car over to any of their appointed agents. Also advise them you will be taking the case back to court to have the warrant further suspended. Send it by special next day delivery so they get the message as fast as possible.


Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well they haven't been yet, we have moved the car to my mom's drive who only lives 2 houses away. She has 3 padlockable bollards blocking the enterance to the drive and also a concrete anchor built into the drive which we have chained to the cars rear axle with a heavy duty chain my mom normally uses the anchor for her caravan but as the season is over she has had it moved to sheltered storage for the winter. If they want the car they are going to have to cause some considerable damage to remove it. The drive is also monitored by CCTV.

 

We have sent a letter special delivery today, outlining our proposals, we will just have to see what comes back, but in the mean time we have and are going to just pay what we have proposed which was the same amount set out in the last court order plus extra to cover the missing months wether they like it or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you tell them in the letter that you were aware of your rights i.e. only a court bailiff can repossess the vehicle and not any agent appointed by them ?


Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes ell-enn we placed all that in the letter, but I suppose it probably wouldn't stop them trying it on hence the vehicle being moved to my moms drive.

 

We've basically put it that if they want the car because what we've offered isn't good enough for them, then back to court we go because I am not accepting any of their ploys and their attempts to play mind games with me, I've told them also I'm coming after them for £700 in late payment fees which will also reduce the balance further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They do not need to instruct a bailiff to seize the car, though they can if they want. Now that they have an order for delivery, they can simply take the car themselves, just like they could if you had paid less than a third and didn't need a court order. The vast majority of finance companies do not bother getting a warrant of delivery, they just recover the vehicle themselves. What you need to do is to make an application to the court to vary the terms of suspension; if successful then they would be prevented from taking the vehicle for as long as you meet the new terms of suspension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...