Is My Agreement Enforceable - Useful

[foolishgirl]

Reader & mightyacorn - if they are both MBNA agreements, you may be better starting a new thread in the MBNA forum where you will receive more specific advice. This is such a large thread your enquiries stand the chance of getting lost, also MBNA seem to have their own peculiar way of doing things

[FlyboyAgain]

I have several accounts in dispute. I got a letter today from my OC which waffles on about the copies they've send in the past. Curiously, they also state that they have sent a copy of the terms ' both current and historic'. Are they implying that current PTs can be applied retroactively? Thing agreement is pre 2004 and a dud, anyway, but are they chancing their arm by saying this?

[diddydicky]

I have several accounts in dispute. I got a letter today from my OC which waffles on about the copies they've send in the past. Curiously, they also state that they have sent a copy of the terms ' both current and historic'. Are they implying that current PTs can be applied retroactively? Thing agreement is pre 2004 and a dud, anyway, but are they chancing their arm by saying this?

 

what they are saying is that there is a clause in the original T & C's which allows them to change the T & C's anytime they like

 

i have always thought this to be a grossly unfair contractual term and even more so now that the EU have brought out a new dictat on unfair terms and i hope soon that someone will test it out

 

as things stand now the creditor could give you 30 days notice that the minimum payment is 25% of the balance

 

change a term so that you have to pay in person at a branch standing on one leg whistling god save the queen

[The GodMother]

do u need to be hopping when u whistle whilest on one leg?

What if u cant whistle?

[Mightyacorn]

do u need to be hopping when u whistle whilest on one leg?

What if u cant whistle?

Try humming....

[diddydicky]

Try humming....

 

thats ok she is a "bird"

[Mightyacorn]

thats ok she is a "bird"

 

 

Glad you noticed

 

 

 

 

[diddydicky]

 

 

Glad you noticed

 

 

 

 

 

of course i did0- also noticed she is in Norfolk so she must be a bootiful Bird!

[The GodMother]

of course i did0- also noticed she is in Norfolk so she must be a bootiful Bird!

 

 

I applied for a bernard matthews Job was over qualified.

 

Oh says yes i am a bootiful bird.

[diddydicky]

I applied for a bernard matthews Job was over qualified.

 

Oh says yes i am a bootiful bird.

 

ahhhhhh but that bernard mathews bloke is Norfolking Good!

[The GodMother]

I know i am from norfolk born and breed as they say.

[diddydicky]

I know i am from norfolk born and breed as they say.

 

born in notts dragged up in yorks and live in kent

 

a right mongrel!

[The GodMother]

lol

 

born norwich dragged up norwich now in great yarmouth.

[FlyboyAgain]

what they are saying is that there is a clause in the original T & C's which allows them to change the T & C's anytime they like

 

i have always thought this to be a grossly unfair contractual term and even more so now that the EU have brought out a new dictat on unfair terms and i hope soon that someone will test it out

 

as things stand now the creditor could give you 30 days notice that the minimum payment is 25% of the balance

 

change a term so that you have to pay in person at a branch standing on one leg whistling god save the queen

 

I won't put up with that - no way! What you've said was exactly what I was thinking. The account I was referring to is definitely unenforceable but I get the impression that the bank is trying anything to get the repayments started again and I do expect this (and my other 'in dispute' accounts) to go to court at some point; I can't see them giving up. What I am now concerned about is the possibilty of the goal posts being moved, as it were, for I am sure that is what the bank troll was hinting at in his recent letter.

Edited June 14, 2009 by FlyboyAgain
spelling

[FlyboyAgain]

what they are saying is that there is a clause in the original T & C's which allows them to change the T & C's anytime they like

 

 

I can undersatnd a company changing its T&Cs, but there is no way that they can expect these changes to applied retroactively!! Or am I wrong? If I am, we all may as well give up now.

[blondie1971]

Blondie can you post the two CCA agreements up into this thread, I notice there are no cancellation rights on the agreement and I'm not sure if there is a significance.

 

Post them here ->>Is My Agreement Enforceable - Useful

 

 

Cheers

 

S.

[InGodITrust]

Hi Caggers

 

Could you please give your opinions in regards to the agreement below. The prescribed terms are incorrect in that the payment schedule does not agree with the stated APR. It took me a mammoth amount of time to actually work out the figures but I need make sure what I am saying is correct.

 

Here's an extract from my skeleton argument in regards to this;

 

.....5.The written agreement the claimant cities in the Particulars of Claim do not comply with section 61 of the consumer credit act 1974 which states that for an agreement to be compliant with the regulations it must embody within the agreement, the prescribed terms laid out in the S11983/1553. Without the prescribed terms the agreement does not conform to section 60(1) CCA 1974 and therefore cannot be properly executed as described in section 61(1) CCA 1974.

6. The purported agreement is flawed in that the payment schedule does not correspond with the stated APR. The agreement states;

The amount of credit is stated as being “12,812.00” the stated APR is stated as being “32.6%”

The interest charged on the amount of credit is therefore £4,176.712

The first payment being on the collection of the goods i.e. “On the Date of this Agreement” is stated as £3,408.00

It then states 47 payments of £447.88, which amounts to a total of £21,050.36

Now this would bring the total amount payable to £28,635.072, which is not correct as the agreement states the total amount payable as being £24,458.36

 

7. The agreement refers to a first instalment of £3408, which includes the documentation fee of £225, the first payment being on collection of goods. This is incorrect as the repayments should be repaying the loan and the deposit paid should not be stated as being part of the loan.

 

As the documentation fee is included within the first payment and is therefore being treated as credit and not within the ‘Total Charge for Credit”. The agreement therefore fails to give regard to s9(4) of the CCA 1974 which provides that;

 

"an item entering into the total charge for credit shall not be treated as credit even though time is allowed for its payment".

 

The agreement was therefore not properly executed, and should be deemed unenforceable since it fails to contain the "prescribed terms" namely that it does not correctly stipulate a payment schedule that agrees with the stated APR.

The prescribed terms are outlined in schedule 6 column 2 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) inter alia: -....

 

Here is the said agreement;

 

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/7063/xagreementpg1.jpg

 

Here is a link to my thread incase your interested in the full story

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/189249-notice-return-goods-court.html

 

 

Thanks in advance

[InGodITrust]

Bump!

[Gingerbread]

Hope you don't mind me posting the link to my thread in here....

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/204972-halifax-cca.html

 

I'd be very grateful for any comments on the CCA. In particular the interest rate / APR calculations.

 

Thank you very much indeed!

[diddydicky]

Hi Caggers

 

Could you please give your opinions in regards to the agreement below. The prescribed terms are incorrect in that the payment schedule does not agree with the stated APR. It took me a mammoth amount of time to actually work out the figures but I need make sure what I am saying is correct.

 

Here's an extract from my skeleton argument in regards to this;

 

 

 

Here is the said agreement;

 

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/7063/xagreementpg1.jpg

 

Here is a link to my thread incase your interested in the full story

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/189249-notice-return-goods-court.html

 

 

Thanks in advance

 

i'm no expert BUt i think you should also feature on the "documention

 

i think you will find that the courts would say that the inclusion of this for interest charges would make the documentation fee exhorbitantly expensive and as a one off fee should not have been subject to you paying interest on it over 47 months at 32%

 

if this is the case then it makes the whole agreement unenforceable

 

i would suggst and accountant would be a good place to obtain an independent confirmation of your figures and exactly what this documentation fee actually cost you over 47 months

[blondie1971]

Blondie can you post the two CCA agreements up into this thread, I notice there are no cancellation rights on the agreement and I'm not sure if there is a significance.

 

Post them here ->>Is My Agreement Enforceable - Useful

 

 

Cheers

 

S.

Hi Caggers

Can anyone give me any advice, this is the link to my thread

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/203669-ccj-copes-solicitors-arrow.html

the agreements i have already attached a couple of posts up

Thanks

[mandym501]

'm not sure if this is the right place to ask this question - I'm pretty new to this

 

I have a loan that is settled and a credit card that is settled - can I still send for the agreements to see if they are enforeceable - they were taken out in 2000. If so and they are unenforceable can I claim back waht I have already paid them?

 

Thanks

 

mandy

[steven4064]

If the accounts are settled, then they have no obligation to send you anything under the CCA 1974

[FlyboyAgain]

Just a quick note to say that's two of my HBOS cards unenforceable, as they can't provide the correct paperwork. Even still, they are trying to accuse me of avoiding liability, ie, denying the existence of the debt, which I am not.

 

Be aware of this: it's duplicitous, an attempt to trick you into saying that you don't owe them anything, which they could then use against you at a later date. Choose your words carefully and don't let them trick you!

[InGodITrust]

i'm no expert BUt i think you should also feature on the "documention

 

i think you will find that the courts would say that the inclusion of this for interest charges would make the documentation fee exhorbitantly expensive and as a one off fee should not have been subject to you paying interest on it over 47 months at 32%

 

if this is the case then it makes the whole agreement unenforceable

 

i would suggst and accountant would be a good place to obtain an independent confirmation of your figures and exactly what this documentation fee actually cost you over 47 months

 

Thanks

 

This is a good point. The thing is the documentation fee should never have been treated as part of loan. Do you know if this would could be related to some sort of "unfair terms" law/act?