Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


Sparkie1723

Consumer Credit Act Agreements

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3701 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 everyone,

 

I have a question to put forward that I need as many forum members to think about very hard.

 

In a lot of credit agreements especially credit card agreements and I'll quote some Halifax Bank of Scotland ( Unison Sainsburys etc etc) and MBNA.

 

If you read these agreements and the terms and conditions you will find in the changes section a list of what they can change within these agreements, thats fine all other cards have the same or pretty much the same, but in the small print in these terms are some other words that say that (on top of the listed changes)...... "for any other change we can change this agreement "

This means that the contract the consumer signed is absolutely loaded against the consumer from the start and he has no rights what so ever in the agreement. Because this term means ANY part of the agreement can be changed no matter what it is, and the consumer has not got a leg to stand on.

 

With this clause being there the only right the consumer has is of cancelling it , that then leaves the balance outstanding due for FULL payment or face a court action to recover the money and a court judgement levied against him/her and on their credit file, so nobody cancels its a catch 22 situation.

 

Some credit card agreements have been changed and this clause removed. examples of these are Lloyds TSB Morgan Stanley Witter and Egg.

 

But the others still put this clause in, Lloyds etc I believe have realised this is "an unfair term" and have removed it from their agreements.

 

But the Bank of Scotland did not remove it from theirs when they drafted their New agreements to comply with the new reguations of 2004 (I think that was the date).

 

What they did was , where this term was one on its own, Term 8 I think, they moved it into term 12 or 13 and "hid it" in the middle of a much larger piece of wording, but it is still there and its hard to find.

 

They rely on the fact that they can make the consumer fall in line and do anything they want under that agreement.

 

I think this is a deliberate attemt to deceive consumers to trap them in a dodgy contract and I ask if anyone would like to comment with their views on this

 

 

Sparkie1723:)

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This would fall into the unfair contracts scenario.

:D


Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is an unfair term, and probably wouldn't stand up in court. In all fairness, a couple of years ago, did creditors and debtors both understand the rights, protection and clauses of credit agreements? How many times did you take out finance and not read the terms and conditions before signing because you wanted that shiny new car sitting in front of you as soon as possible and all it took was a signiture? That new platinum credit card which means you can do your house up - when it asked you to tick the box saying you have read the terms and conditions, did you actually read through them? No!!

 

And now the UK is over a trillion £'s in debt. Are we surprised? No. But it's not always our fault - the cost of living, house prices and everything in general has rocketed and living has never been so expensive before. More and more credit is becoming available, because companies need to meet targets and their acceptance criteria goes done.

 

But on the up side, more and more consumers are becoming legally savvy to just about any contract and will pay more attention and take advantage of the HUGE amount of protection available to consumers in this modern age. Less creditors are winning what they have previously won, and less of them are willing to take more action because more people are fighting back. They know that, unless it's illegal or very uncommon, the law tends to side with the consumer as opposed to a bullying creditor.

 

So times have changed, and so are contracts!


Lived through bankruptcy to tell the tale! Worked in various industries and studied law at university. All advice is given in good faith only :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A large part of the reason for writing a contract between a company and an

indivdual is to establish a set of rules for both parties to conform to throughout the life of the contract. There would be little point in having a contract that changed on a regular basis since in most instances the likelihood

is that it would be to the detriment of the inddividual since they are not the

ones who can alter the contract [we have no rights of reciprocity here ].

 

Now just because companies include certain stipulations in contracts does

not mean that they have any legality [we have seen that with bank charges].

So while they say they can alter and amend their contracts at will, the

reality is somewhat different. For instance, even though a company writes

to all its members advising them that their T&Cs have changed does not

mean that we [or the Court] are bound by that change. And if we read the

Information Commissioners Office guidelines in the Data Protection Act on the subject -

 

A data controller cannot infer consent from a lack of response from the data subject. If data have already been collected and another purpose is subsequently envisaged that would not have been obvious to the data subject, again, consent must be obtained before the data can be used for the new purpose.

 

OK, I accept that they are here referring to data rather than say a material

change to their rules, but I don't think they can automatically take any

change they want for granted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick question about Unenforceable credit agreements:

 

Do i send the CCa request to the original company or the debt company thats been sold the debt ?

 

IE do i send the request to Barclaycard or to So & So debt recovery Ltd ?

 

Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where can I find a template requesting a copy of the original CC agreement (HBOS)? I failed to find it in the library. Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hello

 

i have 2 mbna credit cards that have gone on default and I did a partial settlement top close the accounts. How con I get tghe default removed and argue that the credit agrteement not valid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

who would take on my credit agreements where balances are under 1000 and how would i do it myself

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...