Voluntary Termination with Startline

[TheDude1]

Much appreciated dx for all your help, thank you

 

Yes you are correct the refund letter was dated March 2018.

 

Can you advise the next step we need to take?

Do I make formal complaint stating your findings and demand VT?

 

And perhaps suggest informing the DVLA (via V5) of the new owner also for them
to collect the car asap?

 

Thanks again for a help, cheers

[TheDude1]

Hoping to get a complaint sent this week

 

How does this look?

 

Formal Complaint against Startline Motor Finance Ltd

 

I am writing to make a formal complaint against Startline Motor Finance Ltd.

 

On the 2nd September 2019, I sent a letter to one of your branches in Caerphilly, CF83 9EZ.
Stating my intention and right to terminate the agreement via Voluntary Termination pursuant to section
99 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

On the 3rd September 2019, one of your staff sent an email to [email protected] stating that I am unable to Voluntary terminate the agreement because Startline Motor Finance Ltd terminated the agreement
on the 30th March 2017. You also stated that my only option was to Voluntary surrender the vehicle.

 

On the 11th September 2019, I requested information by means of a Subject Access Request / GDPR.

However during this time that I was awaiting requested information as I disputed your argument of terminating the agreement, you continued to harass me via telephone calls, emails and sending a debt collection officer to my property while this agreement was under dispute.

 

I received the data on 24th October 2019.

 

Upon inspecting the data, the following has come to light.

 

On the 10th March 2018, you refunded me £695 due to Startline Motor Finance Ltd breaching the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

You did not send the required statatory notices of sums in arrears, which resulted in this breach and refund of charges and interest wrongly applied to the agreement.

 

On the contrary of this breach under the Consumer credit Act - I contest all
default notices and termination of this agreement sent before 03/2018 are invalidated due to this breach of the Consumer Credit Act, therefore I contend my original agreemen remains valid and is not currently terminated.

 

I note there were no default notices nor termination of agreements sent to me after 03/2018.

 

Therefore you do not have the right deny my Voluntary Termination of agreement pursuant to section 99 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

Further to the above, if you do not act in timely manner and accept my Voluntary Termination and collect the vehicle before 30th November 2019, then I will be forced to inform the DVLA via the V5 document - New keeper supplement, that I am no longer the registered keeper of the vehicle and all liability of said vehicle would become startline motor finance ltd responsibility, it will also be parked un-taxed and un-insured on a public highway, which I remind you would become an offence under the Section 143 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.

 

I await your reply,

Yours Sincerely

Edited November 10, 2019 by TheDude1

[EssCee]

Sorry, late ro the party on this but....

 

Given a breach of s86B gives rise to temporary unenforceability under the CCA until remedy and an inability to charge during the period of non compliance and considering that enforcement is held as being entering judgment What grounds are there for suggesting the DFN and termination are invalid? 

 

Also if the DFN was somehow invalid what makes the termination invalid (Could it be treated as a simple termination of contract outside of provisions for breach)? In which case could it be unlawful? 

 

Start line do appear shockingmy inept but if the initial termination notice is good, the later notices dont mean anything as you cannot rescind termination amd you cant terminate twice.

 

In my view Very complaint worthy on misleading consumers and s140a unfair relationships. Could be worth arguing that and that the appropriate remedy is to accept the vt they have by their conduct led the debtor to beleive was a right that available to her.

 

Also your proposed letter could be treated as abandonment were you to carry that out and leave the vehicle as suggested.

 

Edited January 18, 2020 by EssCee
Additional information

[TheDude1]

Thanks for information/post.

 

Well I did send the complaint letter on the 12th November 2019.

Had a few nonsense letters back with no relation to the complaint, they even put 2017 as the date.

 

They are not playing ball and totally ignoring our requests. The 8 week time limit for the complaint response has now lapsed.

 

What do you suggest the next step? FCA Report? FOS? Or are both a waste of time?

Thanks

 

[TheDude1]

Ok they have replied to the complaint:

 

Our response to Your Complaint

You contacted us on 10 December 2019 to tell us that you were not happy that we were not allowing you to
voluntarily terminate (VT) your agreement with us because we had already terminated the agreement.

 

You also stated that we had previously refunded you an amount of £695.61 due to a breach of the Consumer
Credit Act 1974 for not fulfilling our legal duty, which you believe means the original agreement remains valid and we do not have the right to deny you a VT.

 

We have now completed our investigation and we can confirm that we are not upholding your complaint.

 

Investigation
Our investigation found that we issued a termination notice on your account on 30 July 2017.

 

While this does confirm that your agreement is no longer, Startline do offer a concession whereby you may continue to use the vehicle if a suitable arrangement to pay is in place and is maintained.

 

This is on the premise that should a payment be missed; we will arrange to re-possess the vehicle immediately.

This also means that you no longer have the right to VT.

 

A terminated agreement cannot be terminated again.

 

We also discovered that on 16th march 2018 a refund of charges and interest applied to your agreement was
refunded to you.

 

This was a total amount of £695.61 and was due to an internal error which meant we had failed to issue a statutory notice of sums in arrears.

 

This was a one-off error and in no way impacted on any previous notices issued, which meant the termination that was issued was still valid.

Summary
As outlined above we are not upholding your complaint and will now close the file.

 

[EssCee]

Not surprised, as per post #28. Perhaps try the s140a avenue.

[dx100uk]

AFAIK there is no such thing as a termination notice without a valid DN?

a default notice must be issued, a TN is merely a letter confirming the DN's actions have been implemented should the debtor fail the conditions stated in the dn?

 

ref the attached doc

have you got the NOSIA letters now they said they would send on?

need to know the period this failure covered please

 

also, go we have all the SAR up here now 

or is there a comms log or account log whereby they are showing their internal notes about the agreement and how you conducted yourself?

 

dx

 

refund letter.pdf

[EssCee]

S98 consumer credit act dx. But it's a moot point if the DFN is compliant as the nosia issue doesn't invalidate it

[dx100uk]

they say in letter dated 20/01/20 that the agreement was terminated on 30 July 2017 and cannot be terminated twice, so your VT request is invalid.

 

startline issued termination or Default notices on the following dates:

……………………..

 

Letter: 08-03-2017  Default Notice
refs a dn dated:31/05/2016 - there is no such DN in an SAR return.

 

nature of breach: instalments of £211.73 on 30th each month.

action to remedy: payment of arrears £438.46  by 29-03-2017

other info:
on or after date 29-03-2017 we shall terminate, withdraw possession and recover sums due upon termination.

total paid: £1532.11
outstanding: £11246.99
less rebate: £3224.03
Amount Due: £8022.66

 

if you act before 29-03-2017  and have paid £4613.25 you can VT.

 

……………………………...

 

letter: 30/03/2017 termination notice 
liable for payment:
arreaers to date : £365.38
the balance of: £10,586.50
total: £10,951.88
7 days notice else ROG+sums outstanding.

.......................

Letter: 11/12/2017 Default Notice
nature of breach: instalments of £211.73 due 30th each month.

action to remedy: payment of arrears £449.23 by 30-12-17

other info:
payments to date: £5226.91
outstanding: £9351.89
less rebate: £2251.41
Amount Due: £7100.48

if you act before 30-12-17 and have paid £7056.90 you can VT.

............

Letter: 27-07-2018 Default Notice
refs a dn dated:31/05/2016 - there is no such DN in an SAR return.

nature of breach: instalments of £211.73 on 30th each month.

action to remedy: payment of arrears £226.73 by 15-08-2018

other info:
on or after date 27-07-2018 we shall terminate,withdraw possesion and recoversums due upon termination.

total paid: £6250.91
outstanding: £7647.28
less rebate: £1590.47
Amount Due: £6065.81

if you act before 15-08-18 and have paid £7056.90 you can VT.

........................ 

letter: 01-10-2018 termination notice 
liable for payment:
arreaers to date : £325.06
the balance of: £6079.75
total: £6404.81
7 days notice else ROG+sums outstanding.

……………………...

 

 

NEW ORDER STATEMENTS.pdf Doc1.pdf

[TheDude1]

Thanks for the help

 

So do I have a strong argument that the agreement is still valid (thus VT remains valid) or do I go down the unfair agreement route as EssCee suggests?

 

They are obviously not budging so I guess now the only way is by taking legal action.

[EssCee]

DFN is dated 8th March 17 and gives 21 days for compliance and appears to be in the prescribed format.

if the arrears are not overstated it's good and so is their termination

 

if I were you I'd complain on the misleading info and s140a and look to refer to the FOS and see where it gets you.

 

Legally assuming the DFN is good, as it appears, you lost the right to terminate as they have said IMHO 

[dx100uk]

Why is it not unlawful rescission, a breach of CCA 1974 87 (1) - they cannot terminate without serving a DN first.

[EssCee]

Because per doc1 above DFN 8th March 2017 termination 30th March 2017...

[dx100uk]

doh how did i miss that 1st dn..updated my list..

 

 

 

 

[Best4CarFinanceClaims]

I wonder if it was mis-sold in the first place?  

 

============================================================

I am here to span the Consumer Action Group website

[TheDude1]

Nothing much to say about this, we haven't heard nothing from them after the first Letter Before Action.

We'll send another LBA and see how it goes.

 

The car is not mine and I merely helping someone, but it looks like she will have to issue a court claim and let the judge decide.

 

If anyone wants to help us build a case (if we have one) we can pay for their expertise.

 

 

[TheDude1]

Hi all, this is still ongoing !

 

Update:

 

They applied to the County Court for a Repossession Order.

 

My sister attended the hearing (Via telephone) voicing her arguments, the Judge denied the repo order and suggested her to get a solicitor.

 

They are still trying to force her to sign a document to Voluntary Surrender the agreement.

We said we won't sign it and will only accept to Voluntary terminate... Same story 'You have lost the right to Voluntary Terminate'

 

Either sign the Surrender document or take it to another hearing.....

 

 

 

 

 

 

[dx100uk]

you mean a return of goods order.

 

dx

 

[TheDude1]

Yes it was

[dx100uk]

next hearing could be fun then..

 

has she kept paying or did she stop as over 50%?

 

i have a feeling the DN they rely upon is invalid anyway as to their own admittance via the NOSIA's refunds, the sum on the DN was not correct.

and ofcourse all the sec 140 stuff.

 

i'd be inclined to point that out too them. 

accept the VT or lets goto court.....

 

why did the judge refuse the ROG? can she remember?

 

 

 

 

 

[EssCee]

The dfn point is not an easy argument at all with fixed sum hire purchase with fixed repayments, but worth a shot.

 

Could you argue estoppel in that they made representations the agreement continued in subsequent letters and notices which you relied upon to your detriment?

 

Just thought vomiting here.

[dx100uk]

yea good though...estoppel ..and as you say, they repeatedly issued subsequent default notices, why issue several when the agreement in their belief was already terminated...they sort of run together to further the thought they don't have a clue what they are doing...bit like moneybarn..they make it up as they go along.

[TheDude1]

Thanks for the help, sorry for the late reply.

 

No, she has not paid anything since the dispute started.

 

The Judge was kind of on her side I think and just rejected the order, not sure exactly why (she doesn't know either) but apparently the solicitor acting for them was quite rude and arrogant, so I guess that didn't help him.

 

Thanks

[dx100uk]

about right

no real law to demand the car so uses abuse to get their way

i suspect starline haven't a clue what they are doing..like i said ..just like moneybarn...fleecers united.

 

dx

 

[dx100uk]

What happened?

 

Dx