Welcome Finance Settlement Figure

[chancer1]

wait to see what you receive but a front copy or made up copy is not acceptable under the act, it has to be a copy of the original, no copy, not enforceable

 

(please correct me someone if nec)

Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

Hey Maybelline, The guy at FOS was adamant that a judge would see that I owe the money, and the lack of a CCA would not necessarily help me, it doesn't seem to be a clear cut rule.

[maybelline]

your agreement may include charges that should not be there or other unfair information re the terms and conditions or apr, this information might render it unenforceable even in a court but you are right, it is a difficult call to make and I havent read any threads yet where a judge has made this decision on someones agreement yet?

(if someone sees one could they provide a link that would be great thanks!)

also, it occurs to me that it is about whether the creditor want to take the risk of taking their 'dodgy' agreements before a judge and risk losing their credit licence? they do not seem to want to do that and often settle, because the consumer is becoming knoweable about the law on prescribed terms and so on.

[maybelline]

sorry, chancer I did not read all your above post - I have sent letters like yours to WF but they always come back with nonsense, they do not appear to understand the CCA at all or are bluffing, all my stuff is now with the Information Commissioners Office, I can pm you if you want to know more but since WF read these threads you must not identify yourself if poss.

[chancer1]

sorry, chancer I did not read all your above post - I have sent letters like yours to WF but they always come back with nonsense, they do not appear to understand the CCA at all or are bluffing, all my stuff is now with the Information Commissioners Office, I can pm you if you want to know more but since WF read these threads you must not identify yourself if poss.

 

Hi Maybellene,

 

I am working from home, so am around if you want to pm me.

 

What do the information commissioners do?

[maybelline]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/33174-consumer-credit-act-agreements-393.html

 

try this link which has the letter on PeterBards thread about enforceability.

 

(Peter, I do hope you dont mind me moving this on to here but the thread is so big it would be hard to find with just the link xxmaybelline)

 

dti

 

21 December 2006

 

Re consumer credit act 1974

 

Thank you for your letter of the 7th of December on behalf of your constituent Mr Peter Bardsley of******************* about a possible irregularity in the Consumer Credit act 1974.

 

The Consumer Credit (Prescribed Periods for Giving Information) Regulations apply to all the situations that ate listed in the Schedule to the Regulations and this include Sections 77 and 78 of the Act, which are about copies of the executed agreement and not pre contractual information

 

The Cancellation Notices and copies of Documents Regulations are made under Section 180 of the Act ) power to prescribe the form etc of documents) and Section 180 enables Regulations to be made to provide for including/excluding certain information from copies sent out under the Act. The Regulations apply to all copies sent our under the Act unless specifically excluded in the Regulations themselves.

 

Mr Bardsley describes a situation in which he was sent a copy of a company’s standard Terms and Conditions when requesting a copy of a signed agreement form. Just sending the Terms and Conditions is a breach of the Act and Regulations as, apart from the information that the Regulations provide that you may exclude, the copy must be a “true copy” of the agreement**

 

If Mr Bardsley feels that the rules are being flouted he should report the companies concerned to Trading standards and the Office of Fair Trading. It is also a breach of the Act and the Regulations to send the application form rather that a “true copy” of the Agreement.

On the point that Mr Bardsley makes about unscrupulous companies adjusting agreements, If there were a dispute about an agreement, the lender would need to prove to a court that there was an agreement and, it is highly likely that the lender would have to produce the original signed document to prove they had and agreement with the consumer to start with,

The lender should need to prove to a court that there was and agreement **and, it is highly likely that the lender would have to produce the original signed document to prove they had an agreement with the consumer to start with. If the lender can’t prove the existence of the agreement, winning any court case would prove difficult.

 

 

Approved By the Minister and signed in His presence

 

Pp Ian Mc Cartney

[jamieprec1979]

i too had the same senerio,i got in touch with them and they did me a letter stating that the loan was not secured on the property(they went back and looked at the aggrement was which secured on my previous property),as obviously it is there administrative mistake.Also you could also ring the land registry to see if there is a second charge on the property,i did this and they sent me paper work to state that the property is free any charges.

This should be enough proof for any mortgage lender because any charges are to be logged with the land registry.

 

Hope i was some help

[The cobbett slayer]

Afternoon people.

 

Maybelline - I have looked at the wording of the charge on your deeds and it does indeed appear to be a full charge and would need to be postponed in the event of you wishing to remortgage, or would need to be redeemed in full if you were to sell the property. It is in effect, a second mortgage.

 

In my case, it is a unilateral notice, which acts as a caution to anyone else with a financial interest in the property. I've completed my remortgage today without any consent or DoP from Welcome

[chancer1]

Thanx Jamie,

 

All they have offered to do so far is sign me up for a new credit agreement for 8K, I did tell them where they could stick that.

 

Thanx for the pm Maybelline, I did reply, but your mailbox is full....

[maybelline]

sorry chancer, just emptied the mailbox.

 

cobettslayer, many thanks, unlucky eh, they want 8k to settle but this is totally extortionate, having borrowed 2,999 for a car and then reborrowed further down the line to settle the HP but only 2k extra borrowin, so how do they want 13 altogether, i have already paid 6k!

 

I think I will look at remortgaging and possibly N1 about their agreement.

[chancer1]

Thanx Maybelline but still says.... maybelline has exceeded their stored private messages quota and can not accept further messages until they clear some space.

 

What I find amazing is, I have spent most of the day on the telephone to the FSA FOS FLA tried to get the OFT but you get redirected to Consumer Direct (bless them, think i ended up informing her), it seems that the OFT regulate the Consumer Credit Act, but you cannot speak to them to get advice, CD clearly stated this was out of their remit, I only want advise on what actions these bodies (FSA FOS FLA OFT TS) will take against WF due to non compliance, and nobody is willing to say.....

 

No wonder the average jo bloggs just gets stuffed by these fleecing finance companies.

 

Sorry... rant over

[maybelline]

mailbox should be ok now.

[maybelline]

still bafled as to how loans under 25K can be mortgages though or attract a mortgage indemnity fee??

Home.co.uk: Mortgage Glossary: Higher Lending Charge

[The cobbett slayer]

I'm looking at that one. WF charged me £1100 MIP on the original loan but from what I have seen, this is at least inappropriate for loans of less than 75% of the security and would appear to go against the instruction of the FOS.

[maybelline]

precisely? all it abit strange, I think some caggers are claiming this back from WF but they have written to me to say they never put this on loans - ha ha ha and the earth isnt round!

[maybelline]

I think I can raise this issue at the hearing for the other charges cant I as it is not a full hearing but a pre hearing or directions hearing, I have not sent the bundle yet. mis sold MIG or hlc whatever they call it, stilll is mis sold and now I need it dealth with and the whole issue of calling a secured loan of less than 25k being a treated as a mortgage by WF.

[chancer1]

Don't know about that 25k, if you search for min mortgage amount, almost all say 10,000, and i saw 1 at 15,000 & it was nice to see the council of mortgage lenders website was about as useful as a paper bucket

[maybelline]

sorry about that chancer I will check this out.

[chancer1]

Here is the charges added onto the loan at beginning - Whats really interesting is... the first interest posting is £206 - the monthly payments were set at £163

 

[chancer1]

Some thing else, going through this statement - using a mortgage calculator set at 10 years entered amount and got a interest of 20.1% - 4 years after with fees added the amount and the interest has moved to 20.7% and without fees added 21.7%, so if that is variable interest are they not supposed to advise on every rise?

 

is it variable - or are they just skimming a 1/2% of the top as well

[The cobbett slayer]

precisely? all it abit strange, I think some caggers are claiming this back from WF but they have written to me to say they never put this on loans - ha ha ha and the earth isnt round!

 

Funny that they say they don't charge it - it's on my original agreement!

[maybelline]

hello, baffles me??how much I wonder would you pay altogether if APR is 15.9 (guestimate) 151 over 180 months is an awful lot of money isnt it for a shabby old car that was scrapped in the end, car price 2,999.

 

yes its on mine too!

[chancer1]

hello, baffles me??how much I wonder would you pay altogether if APR is 15.9 (guestimate) 151 over 180 months is an awful lot of money isnt it for a shabby old car that was scrapped in the end, car price 2,999.

 

yes its on mine too!

 

Hey mabelline, thats £27,180. you could've bought yourself a new Merc for that.

 

One way to look at it, you were paying back £16.66 approx per month off the actual debt

 

Using a mortgage calc, 2999 over 15 years @ £151 per month = 60.5% interest

 

Mortgage required

(omit commas) £ 2999

Repayment period

(omit commas)

15 years

Interest rate

(enter 10% as 10)

60.5 %

 

 

Monthly repayment

(omit commas)

£ 151.43

 

:eek:

[maybelline]

yes, must admit do not understand apr but how can it be the rate they say when it you look at the payment rate and period!!??

 

could this stand up in court!

[chancer1]

I have no idea, I do not confess to know all, I just used a interest calculator.

 

they post interest monthly, then they seem to charge interest again on the outstanding amount every month, in effect, surely that is charging interest on top of interest every month????

 

I have some statement pages if anyone has knowledge of this

[maybelline]

yes I am agreeing with you, how can 'they' that is WF justify their rates that do not add up.