Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have not included details of the dispute because I am no longer interested in pursuing this case.   My current aim is to end this claim in the most cost effective way possible.   But if it helps, here are some details of the dispute: I believe that I was offered a poor service by the defendant and verbal promises that were not followed through I had paid for services in full to the defendant but only used about a third worth of the services that bought before demanding a partial refund for service I have not received The defendant refused the refund and pointed me towards their terms of use that specify a no refund policy 2 Years passed with me continuing to be disgruntled by this therefore filed a claim to gain some closure The defendant did not reply to the claim within the allocated time therefore I was granted with a CCJ Once the defendant received the CCJ they claimed that I used the wrong address and my claim is defective I did not use the wrong address as I used the address exactly as specified on Companies House The defendant sent an email asking to set aside the judgment on the basis that the proceedings are defective, I did not reply to this email The defendant submitted an application to set aside the judgment on the basis that the proceedings are defective and that they had a high prospect of success The hearing took place The judge confirmed I used the correct address The defendant brought a new argument during the hearing claiming that I sued the wrong company The defendant claims that I have behaved unreasonably by not responding to their email The judge awarded the defendant costs and set the judgment aside I do not believe that I sued the wrong company rather I believe the business was trading before being incorporated The defendant confirmed details of the service provided and payments made, leaving me confused as to how they are able to make a claim that I sued the wrong business while confirming that I was engaged with their services.    
    • As you haven't told us anything about the dispute, it's really not possible to advise you
    • I bought an iPhone as a gift for the other half, and wasn't happy with it, so I arranged to send it back to the retailer for a refund using Hermes via Parcel2Go. I bought another one to send instead and again booked Hermes via Parcel2Go. I dropped both parcels off at the Parcelshop, got my receipt, and to absolutely nobody's surprise both of them went missing! One entered the network and then disappeared, one didn't even get picked up until I complained, then disappeared as well.  Having sent all the documents Parcel2Go were asking for, they have offered to settle my claim for £20 (+ the cost of carriage)   Date Sent: 18 Oct 21 what was the item: iPhone what was its value: £670 was the item properly declared: Yes was the value properly declared: Yes did you take out the so-called insurance: No did you book this with HERMES directly or did you use a broker such as Packlink or parcel2go?: Parcel2go Was the parcel simply lost? Or is it damaged and then destroyed? Or is it simply damage?: Lost   As far as I'm concerned they knew what they were carrying and how much it was worth, and either didn't take proper care of them, or somewhere along the line someone's been dishonest and nabbed them. I didn't get their extortionate extra insurance because I would have had to pay it twice as it was for two parcels.   Could someone please help me draft a response to their less-than-generous offer and for a county court claim?
    • Here are some background points on my claim:  I used the governments online Money Claims service to file a claim against a business for an amount of £1700 The business did not respond to the claim in a timely manner I requested a CCJ and was granted one against the defendant The defendant applied to set aside judgment A hearing to set aside judgment took place The judge awarded costs to the defendant and agreed for the judgment to be set aside, they also granted the defendant 28 days to file a defence The defendant was trying to claim costs of approximately £4800 however the judge deemed that excessive and only awarded them with £2000 on claim that I behaved unreasonably by not responding to their email The defendant claims that I submitted the claim against the wrong company (I don't believe this is the case). At no point I was served with a notice of allocation onto the small claims track so I am not certain that my case is allocated to this track   I am currently trying to determine the best option to proceed with this case while trying to keep the costs as low as possible believing that my prospects of success are low.   If I discontinue the case now could I be liable for further costs automatically as my case has not been allocated yet? Am I better off discontinuing now as the defendant might try to claim more costs or should I wait until allocation?   I have tried to seek confirmation from the defendant that no further costs will incur in return for discontinuance but the defendant is refusing to provide this and is threatening with more costs if they reach the stage where a defence is filed.   I have sought legal advice from two different lawyers, one advised to discontinue ASAP and be prepared for a bill of costs, stating that this will be less costly than discontinuing at a later stage. The other lawyer advised that I should not discontinue until the case is allocated to the small claims track to protect me against costs. The conflict has left me very confused
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Dodgy? HP aAgreement - Broker or Lender at Fault?


df1970
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2850 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

 

I've been looking around all morning to find some case law or regulation information to support an argument I'm having.

 

My questions is: If there is a problem with how a HP agreement was originally put together by a broker, should the lender also bear responsibility?

 

I'm arguing with a lender about some errors with a loan agreement but they are pushing me back by saying it's not their problem and that I should take it up with the broker.

 

I'm pretty sure that a lender is responsible for how their brokers put deals together.

 

Or am I wrong?

 

Cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whose signature is on the loan agreement - theirs or the brokers ?

 

I thought broker simply introduced 2 parties.. the lender and the borrower - the contract is then with the lender !!

 

I will however, ask others on the site team :)

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thanks for the quick response. The agreement is signed by the lender.

 

Then IMHO, the lender is responsible.. however, do please wait for those with more knowledge to confirm this. I have left an S.O.S on your behalf :)

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

and under section 56 CCA

the lender are responsible for the brokers actions.

 

not GE Money is it?

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

:thumb: Thanks dx

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks.

 

It's a HP agreement for a car and the lender is British Credit Trust.

 

FOS are handling it at the moment but it's a very messy affair.

 

I made a comment in my complaint that BTC are liable for the actions of their broker

but the FOS want me to support my statement.

 

I had a reference to such a position but can no longer find it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could I rely on CCA 1974 Section 75 - equal liability or does this only relate to faulty goods? (my issue is incorrect purchase price of vehicle, terms omitted from the agreement and secret commission).

Link to post
Share on other sites

god even worse than GE.

 

BCT were Thames Credit.

 

they were buried to hide all their dodgy dealings with back handers to dealers for various commissions in garages

 

what are you disputing please?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

section 56.

 

Consumer Credit Act Section 56. refers...

— (1) In this Act “antecedent negotiations ” means any negotiations with the debtor or hirer—

(a) conducted by the creditor or owner in relation to the making of any regulated agreement, or

(b) conducted by a credit-broker in relation to goods sold or proposed to be sold by the credit-broker to the creditor before forming the subject-matter of a debtor-creditor-supplier agreement within section 12(a), or

© conducted by the supplier in relation to a transaction financed or proposed to be financed by a debtor-creditor-supplier agreement and “negotiator ” means the person by whom negotiations are so conducted with the debtor or hirer.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/Ombudsman-news/79/79-car-finance.htm

 

I dont know if the information on the link above will help - if so, then you can quote the Ombudsmans own article at them.. because they wrote it !

 

And this from the OFT

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/OFTwork/credit-licensing/do-you-need/licence-categories/

 

Also, in the following Link the OFT appear to be saying that the lender is responsible for the actions of its agents.

 

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]49185[/ATTACH]

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

that has been really helpful reading. Thanks.

 

I'm just deciding now whether I should focus on section 56 or section 75.

 

Basic summary of facts:

 

 

  1. I signed an 11 page HP agreement. 2 years later I realised that sections 1 to 8 of the terms were missing from the 11 pages. This has now been admitted as an error by the broker.
  2. The purchase price of the vehicle on the agreement is also wrong by £1500 too much. Again an admin error - nothing to do with part ex or refinancing etc just a simple numbers error.
  3. Broker put in writing that they do not get paid any commission. Subject Access Request revealed that a commission was paid.

 

My argument is that the agreement is void. For a number of reasons I need to focus my complaint on the lender.

 

So, I'm guessing I can use section 56 to make the lender jointly liable for the errors made by the broker. Correct?

 

Can I also use section 75 on the basis of misrepresentation (wrong price of goods and secret commission) and also loss (paying too much as the wrong price was put on the agreement)

 

Cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

is there repo involved in this too

as its in the repo forum ?

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok I've moved you to the general debt forum

where you'll get better help I expect.

 

if the HP Agreement is crap by the ways you indicate

under section 90 that gives you the car

and all the payments back in many cases I think.

 

the agreement is irredeemably flawed

 

section 90 refers.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see - so as the broker sold the goods to the lender who subsequently HP'd them to me, that eliminates section 75 correct?

 

Also, section 90 seems to be about protected goods being repossessed. That's not relevant here - yes it's protected but I still have the goods.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HP works by the garage selling the car to the finance company who then supply it on hire until the consumer's final payment effectively buys it. The finance company also supplies the goods as well as the credit thereby being solely liable for the goods and not jointly so under S75.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok great - thanks for that.

 

So, I'm relying on Section 56 - Antecedent Negotiations.

 

I've found an OFT document OFT303 which actually speaks about Section 75 but comments on Section 56 as follows:

 

Frequently, the supplier is the only

person a customer has any contact

with during negotiations. He provides

information about the credit terms as

well as about the goods, land, or

services being financed by the credit -

as when a furniture salesman explains

to a prospective buyer the hire

purchase terms on a piece of

furniture. In this case (if it is a

regulated agreement), under section

56 of the Act the supplier is taken to

act on the credit grantor’s behalf - as

his agent - as well as his own. In

effect, this makes the credit grantor

responsible for the negotiations as if

he had conducted them himself.

 

So on that basis, the lender is responsible for the negotiations as if they had actually conducted them. In my case this would be the incomplete contract, incorrect purchase price and the secret commission.

 

Can I argue on that basis?

 

Cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...