Welcome Finance Agreement

[andys123]

doesnt specify anything about secured or unsecured, just fixed-sum agreements

[emanevs]

it says "FIXED SUM LOAN AGREEMENT...."

[Jamesx81x]

Only a court can declare an agreement unenforceable.

 

You could dispute it with Welcome saying it is missing a perscribed term but you would ultimately have to take it to court.

[andys123]

so the prescribed term of total amount payable is not on the agreement?

have checked mine thoroughly iand it isn't there, have just checked my car loan agreement with black horse and it is definateley on there agreement under key financial information.

[Jamesx81x]

It is a perscribed term and should be on!

[andys123]

a court shall not make an enforcement order (i.e. a consumer credit or hire agreement

will be automatically unenforceable) where:

• prescribed requirements in relation to the execution of regulated agreements

(set out in section 61(1)(a) of the 1974 Act) were not complied with or a

document containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was not signed

by the debtor or hirer;

This is section taken from section 15 'enforcibility of agreements'

[jamesf104]

Its not on ours either nor is the total interest payable, you have to calculate it! Unexecuted agreement!

[andys123]

"key financial information (including the amount of credit or the credit limit, the duration of the agreement, the APR, the total amount payable, and the amounts and timing of repayments)"

 

The above is a quote from the The Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations (amendments), it specifically states that the total amount payable should be on the agreement under 'key financial information'. My agreement with WFS doesn't have this information.

 

Is this as obvious to others as it is to me that a prescribed item is missing?

[Jamesx81x]

As i previously said it is a perscribed term and you need to ask Welcome why they have not included it.

 

You are well within your rights to put the account into dispute and they will only be able to enforce it through the courts.

 

That been said it is advisable to keep up payments as if it went to court and you had stopped payments the judge could imply you are trying to get out of the agreement on a technicallity.

 

Always best to maintain payments while raising disputes then they hold nothing on you and the judge will make his own mind up as to what should happen.

[andys123]

Is there any clarifiaction as to whether the "total amount payable is a prescribed term" or not? Different threads I have read do not specify it as being a prescibed term but reading different parts of the CCA is states that it is and if it is missing from an agreement then that agreement is "automatically" unenforceable.

[emanevs]

it is.

 

Consumer Credit Regulations 1983, (SI 1983/1553), Schedule 1, (9 + 11)

 

enjoy!

 

[andys123]

Its not until you start getting hassled and start looking at things that you realise that this basic information is missing. Did you say emanevs that your has no total amount payable neither?

[emanevs]

absolutely!

 

my agreement is from back in 2005.

 

Would you agree its unenforceability?

[emanevs]

OOPS!

 

Its actually Schedule 6!!

 

soz!!!!:eek:

[andys123]

if 'total amount payable' is definitately a prescribed term and subsequently missing then it has to be unenforceable. I've read different parts of the act and various amendments and if one of the prescribed terms is missing then its no court can enforce - its automatically unenforceable. Anyone esle on here have a different opinion?

I have sent off your adjusted template letter to WFS but after going through my agreement with a fine tooth comb I still didn't spot that the TAP was missing so gonna wait to hear back from them and then submit a letter saying that one of the prescibed terms, ie: 'total amount' payable is missing.

[emanevs]

Schedule 1 is headed “INFORMATION TO BE CONTAINED IN DOCUMENTS EMBODYING REGULATED CONSUMER CREDIT AGREEMENTS OTHER THAN MODIFYING AGREEMENTS”.

 

As our agreements does not comply with the above, can anyone give some legislation confirming that as the agreement does not comply with schedule 1 its unenforceable????

[supasnooper]

I think you've answered your own question.

 

The Regulations are Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 S1553

[andys123]

Is that particular "schedule/SI/amendment" what I should quote when questioning the agreement?

How does that relate to being "automatically unenforceable" - is it?

[emanevs]

I think you've answered your own question.

 

The Regulations are Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 S1553

 

Cause im such an idiot, I dont know what you are saying.

 

I think you mean that because it doesnt comply with schedule 1, its unenforceable???

 

I thought that this is discretionary by the Court unenforceable, and not automatically unenforceable???

 

If it is unenforceable through schedule 1, please can you guide me to the legislation that would state "non compliant with schedule 1 - the agreement is uenforceable."

[andys123]

Section 15: Enforceability of regulated agreements

37. The 1974 Act provides that in certain circumstances where the requirements of

the Act are not complied with in relation to regulated agreements or to security

provided in relation to such agreements, the agreement or security is enforceable

against the debtor or hirer only on an order of the court. Sections 127(1) and (2) of

the 1974 Act give the court discretion whether to grant an enforcement order in those

circumstances subject to subsections (3) and (4). Section 127(3) and (4) provides that

a court shall not make an enforcement order (i.e. a consumer credit or hire agreement

will be automatically unenforceable) where:

• prescribed requirements in relation to the execution of regulated agreements

(set out in section 61(1)(a) of the 1974 Act) were not complied with or a

document containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was not signed

by the debtor or hirer;

Check this and see if you agree or anyone else for that matter

•

[emanevs]

Not sure about that one,

 

how about this:

 

Section 61 (1) - A regulated agreement is not properly executed unless

 

(b) a document embodies all the terms of the agreement other than impled terms

 

As schedule one states:

 

“INFORMATION TO BE CONTAINED IN DOCUMENTS EMBODYING REGULATED CONSUMER CREDIT AGREEMENTS OTHER THAN MODIFYING AGREEMENTS”.

 

As there is no 'total amount payable' - game over???

[andys123]

Thats where I'm coming from.

 

If, Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 S1553, is read correctly and the total amount payable is a prescibed item and not present on the agreement it is automatically unenforceable.

[BEBOBEBO]

Quick question on this, mine has the figure also stated which falls under automatically unenforceable. if we was offered a re-write and did not sign it would'nt it look bad in court on our part as welcome would have tried to put things right by issuing a re-write? I hope not but just something thats been bugging me.

[emanevs]

Not sure about that one,

 

how about this:

 

Section 61 (1) - A regulated agreement is not properly executed unless

 

(b) a document embodies all the terms of the agreement other than impled terms

 

As schedule one states:

 

“INFORMATION TO BE CONTAINED IN DOCUMENTS EMBODYING REGULATED CONSUMER CREDIT AGREEMENTS OTHER THAN MODIFYING AGREEMENTS”.

 

As there is no 'total amount payable' - game over???

 

Schedule 6 STATES THE PRESCRIBED TERMS -

 

SCHEDULE 1 STATES:

“INFORMATION TO BE CONTAINED IN DOCUMENTS EMBODYING REGULATED CONSUMER CREDIT AGREEMENTS OTHER THAN MODIFYING AGREEMENTS”.

[BEBOBEBO]

So basically dont sign a revised one, as the orginal one will still stand whatever ?