Claiming on a Business account? Lets join forces?

[Ibsys]

You may find that what you have is not a credit agreement but an application form copy with terms and conditions which does not comly under the CCA 1974. The balance may be totally unenforceable. Se quote below;

"Failure by a lender to observe strictly, the intricate requirements of the Act can lead to a loan being completely unenforceable with no right of restitution or other form of relief"

 

- Lord Justice Clarke, 2002

[Ibsys]

You may find that what you have is not a credit agreement but an application form copy with terms and conditions which does not comly under the CCA 1974. The balance may be totally unenforceable. Se quote below;

"Failure by a lender to observe strictly, the intricate requirements of the Act can lead to a loan being completely unenforceable with no right of restitution or other form of relief"

 

- Lord Justice Clarke, 2002

 

sorry about the spelling...the cat jumped on the desk!

[tifo]

You may find that what you have is not a credit agreement but an application form copy with terms and conditions which does not comly under the CCA 1974. The balance may be totally unenforceable. Se quote below;

"Failure by a lender to observe strictly, the intricate requirements of the Act can lead to a loan being completely unenforceable with no right of restitution or other form of relief"

 

- Lord Justice Clarke, 2002

 

Where is this extract taken from?

[Ibsys]

Where is this extract taken from?

 

I don't know exactly where this quote comes from but it is part of a judgement by Lord Justice Clark in 2002 but I don't know the actual case but it was where a borrower was contending an agreement under the CCA 1974. It was handed to me by someone in the TUE Club. He has studied the Consumer redit Act for about 2 years now.

 

For and agreement to be enforceable it has to have all the prescribed terms in it, Sections 60, 61, sections 127 and some others of the loan or credit card lending is not enforceable and cannot be enforced by a court.

 

However, I shall find this out for you as it intrigues me as well.

[Ibsys]

I don't know exactly where this quote comes from but it is part of a judgement by Lord Justice Clark in 2002 but I don't know the actual case but it was where a borrower was contending an agreement under the CCA 1974. It was handed to me by someone in the TUE Club. He has studied the Consumer redit Act for about 2 years now.

 

For and agreement to be enforceable it has to have all the prescribed terms in it, Sections 60, 61, sections 127 and some others of the loan or credit card lending is not enforceable and cannot be enforced by a court.

 

However, I shall find this out for you as it intrigues me as well.

 

On looking for Lord Justice Clarke, I was browsing and found this. It outlines a case in McGuffic v RBS and is on pdf. (the first link) It is about anything under the CCA 1974 with all the sections and about unenforceability and CRAs. But I will find the quote you asked for.

 

Link; Judicial Internet - Search Results

[the main man]

Where is this extract taken from?

 

McGinn v Grangewood Securities Ltd

[Ibsys]

McGinn v Grangewood Securities Ltd

 

No, it isnt that one, it was before Lord Justice Clarke in 2002 but I dont know the case

[MARTIN3030]

*McGinn v Grangewood Securities Ltd. 2002

Lord Justice Clarke ruled:

Failure by a lender to observe strictly the intricate requirements of the (Consumer Credit 1974) Act can lead to a loan being completely unenforceable with no right of restitution or other form of relief.

**Subject to acceptance.

[Ibsys]

Thanks for this. Although I did not see his name "on the sheet" but saw another Judges name on the sheet. But all the terms are in the Act so I think it is definitive.

[emandcole]

emand can you post up t & c or send me pm they woudl be useful regards gAZ

 

For Gaz and anyone else interested in this set of T&C's issued by Lloyds governing a non business Mastercard Account. As you can see there is no charge information whatsoever to allow them to add their 'service fees' which I believe is in direct breach of CCA 1974 requirements. This agreement is from August 1997 and is on the back of an application form.

 

Worth checking any agreements you may have from Lloyds as they may also have failed to list the charges applicable meaning they had no contractual right to help themselves. Interestingly when they also sent the currect T&C's the charge information was very clear and very comprehensive. Also relevent if your creditor subsequently issued a default notice against you as the amount on any default will be incorrect which as we all know has serious implications for the creditor/DCA if they instigate litigation against you .

img005.pdf

[gaz2006]

Thanks is there anything you can send to show it s 1997 as coud be any year !! Regards Gaz

[MARTIN3030]

Strange because the terms are headed-BANK COPY

[Ibsys]

"direct breach of CCA 1974 requirements. This agreement is from August 1997 and is on the back of an application form."

 

Firstly, the application form is before April 2007 which means that a court cannot enforce the debt if there is a breach of the CREDIT AGREEMENT

 

Secondly, and APPLICATION FORM is not a CREDT AGREEMENT which is required under the CCA 1974 which means it is now a valid form of contract under law. To different things!

 

I would not worry about the charges as I would not worry about the debt and without a proper CCA agreement if you put it in dispute the lender cannot put a negative entry on any Credit Reference Agency and if they do they commit an offence.

[Ibsys]

Re PDF copy of application form-terms. This is not a credit agreement. It is unenforceable if both the lender and the borrower have not signed it. It must have all the "prescribed terms " in it as in Section 60, and 61, not just both signatures but every other financial information. Another section says the agreement can only be enforced in a court of law but if all the terms are not in the document and entered properly, the the court is precluded from enforcing the debt.

[emandcole]

Thanks guys for the info, the account has been in dispute for over a year now and although Lloyds send me the odd 'we're going to kill you unless...' type letter nothing is happening with it. I'll deal with it all in good time as concentrating on bigger fish at the minute! It also has PPI on it which I didn't tick or want so lots to do with this account in the near future .

 

Gaz, as for it being 1997 terms I can only say it's the back of the application form which was dated 1997, this doesn't of course mean these same terms weren't used in later years or earlier years either.

[Ibsys]

If there was a PPI which was not asked for then all premiums paid are refundable with interest. Send a section 77/78 to the lender, and as experience tells me Lloyds dont comply or answer to anything at all, what weas signed by both lender and borrower on the agreement, not application form, is what governs the agreement. A 77/78 is what the lender must comply with within 12 days, (77) and if this is not done within 30 days then the consequences are in the (78) part. Unenforceable so you won't have to pay it while the lender is in default. He may not either serve you with a default or enter a negative reference on any CRA.

[agam]

I started reading this thread at about 9pm it is now 1.30am and am I right in saying that it has become difficult to claim business bank charges.

 

I sent barclays the 1st letter suggested on 'this is money' website I received the letter saying we have done nothing wrong go away.

 

So I sent the second letter, this appears to have been ignored.

 

I am now at the point where I am supposed to be filing a claim.

Should I continue with this?

Also if I lose in court is it going to cost me money?

[MARTIN3030]

Welcome to the site.Can you give some details about the account-was it a sole trader/Partnership/Limited or what ?

What periods do the charges relate to start to finish ?

Were there any loans ?

[agam]

We started trading as a partnership in Aug 2005, my husband opened the business account with barclays so it is in his name but with myself being a person who can discuss things etc. Everything ran along fine until 2007 when we ran into difficulties with more money going out than coming in so we incurred alot of 'unpaids nout' of £35 a time, some days this was running t0 3 lots of charges. Therefore in order for the account to be able to pay a direct debit I also had to come up with this money.

 

Eventually the account was £2000 over our agreed £3000. I went to talk to our business manager on numerous occasions with a view to sorting this out. All they were interested in me doing was remortgaging so that I could pay them in full. We also had a £13,000 business loan which was being paid monthly. Remortgaging at that time was going to cost us around £10,000 and as I was constantly down to my last £20 I did not see this as a reasonable option.

 

The account was closed and it and the loan were passed to the recovery team, which appears to be a good thing. I no longer have huge bank charges and as far as I know I am no longer paying interest.

 

Whilst in discussion with the bank manager in 2007/08 I did detail all the charges to show the bank that it was because of these charges that I had run into difficulty as they amounted to around £2500

 

We are still trading and things are a little easier now. As I am a cash business I use my current account and no one seems to be any the wiser.

[MARTIN3030]

Thanks for the update.

Yes running a business with your personal current account is legal and although the banks dont like it many resort to this (out of necessity)

Will digest what you write and respond further.

[agam]

Thanks

[lyndanic]

I am in the very same position with barclays. After the first letter was told no way and so I complained to FOS who wrote back saying they have reviewed my case and could not uphold my compaint as the charges were not penalties!!! The charges were for DD that were not paid.

 

Can anyone help with a reply to FOS?

[steven4064]

lyndanic

 

Welcome to CAG

 

my advice - forget the FOS as they are completely useless. Post some details of your case, we may be able to help, particuularly as the charges are for unpaid DDs

[lyndanic]

Thank you. We had a business account with barclays. We had just wanted to keep our buy to let mortgages and rents seperate from our personal account, but then we had a couple of tenants who stated paying late or not at all and after we went through our savings the bank charges started at £35 pounds a time for returned DD. Over three years the charges had added up to £5300, I sent the first letter to barclays asking for money back but it was denied so I then went to FOS not sure what to do next ??

[Ibsys]

The FOS is a complete waste of time, they don't consider all the issues, won't award for distress and disruption and they put things in limbo for months on end. When I complained about their speed i was moaned at for complaining and they said "I had cost the bank their fee of £495 which is charged by the FOS" and it makes things more difficult later when the FOS say the bank has not done anything wrong.