Unfair law fails to protect logbook loan consumers – Law Commission

‘Logbook loan borrowers have too little protection – and those who unwittingly buy cars subject to logbook loans have none at all. Today the Law Commission opens a consultation to reform the archaic law underlying logbook loans – the “Bills of Sale Acts” – which remains unchanged since Victorian times.’

Full story

Law Commission, 9th Spetember 2015

Source: www.justice.gov.uk/lawcommission

Unfair (banking/credit) Relationships – Relief under Sections 140A–140D of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 – No. 5 Chambers

Posted September 7th, 2015 in banking, consumer credit, judiciary, loans, news, unfair contract terms by sally

‘Under sections 140A-140D of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 credit transactions may be re-opened as a matter of judicial discretion. These wide judicial powers were added to the Act in 2006 (and came into force on 6 April 2007) in substitution of the previous, more limited, “extortionate credit bargains” regime which had routinely failed to provide an effective remedy to borrowers and guarantors seeking to challenge the terms of their agreement with the lender.’

Full story

No. 5 Chambers, 3rd September 2015

Source: www.no5.com

Regina v Bhatti – WLR Daily

Posted August 4th, 2015 in admissibility, appeals, consumer credit, crime, evidence, law reports by sally

Regina v Bhatti [2015] EWCA Crim 1305; [2015] WLR (D) 346

‘Where the police obtained financial information from a credit ratings agency in reliance on section 29(1) of the Data Protection Act 1998, such information having been obtained by the agency from customers who had expressly agreed in their credit applications and agreements that their data might be shared for the purpose of crime detection, prevention and prosecution, the procedural requirements of Schedule 1 to the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 were not bypassed and the information was lawfully obtained, so that it was not precluded from admissibility in criminal proceedings.’

WLR Daily, 30th July 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

NRAM plc v McAdam and another – WLR Daily

NRAM plc v McAdam and another [2015] EWCA Civ 751; [2015] WLR (D) 334

‘In a specific loan agreement, which was the template for agreements between a bank and numerous customers, the protections under section 77A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 had not been incorporated, and no estoppel arose from the existence of the statutory wording in the agreement. Nor was it possible to treat the borrowers “as if” they had been under the protection provided by the 1974 Act. However, there had been a representation (and contractual warranty) arising from the statement that the loan agreement was a regulated agreement, when it was not, which would have entitled the borrowers to sue for misrepresentation or breach of contractual warranty.’

WLR Daily, 23rd July 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Summary Disposal of Unfair Relationships Claims: Axton & Axton v GE Money Mortgages Limited and another [2015] EWHC 1343 – Henderson Chambers

Posted July 27th, 2015 in burden of proof, consumer credit, insurance, news by sally

‘The High Court (Swift J, 22 May 2015) has upheld an order dismissing a claim under section 140A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA) on the summary basis, in the absence of conduct on the part of a lender causative of unfairness in a debtor/creditor relationship.’

Full story

Henderson Chambers, 3rd June 2015

Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk

Unregulated Credit Agreements: When is it safe for a lender to rely upon the business purpose exemption? – 11 Stone Buildings

Posted July 27th, 2015 in consumer credit, loans, news by sally

‘Consumer credit legislation requires lenders to negotiate a minefield of regulation and formalities. Even small errors in form, content or procedure can render a loan contract unenforceable and prevent a lender recovering the sums advanced. In the circumstances it is understandable that the exemptions within the legislation, such as that created by s.16B(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 are often invoked to avoid the rigours of regulation. However, this approach can give rise to new risks as demonstrated in Woolsey v Payne [2015] EWHC 968 (Ch) [2015] All ER (D) 24 (May) and Wood v Capital Bridging Finance Limited [2015] EWCA Civ 451. Sarah Clarke, counsel in Woolsey and Payne, suggests how the lawyers and lenders should modify their approach to this exemption in light of these decisions.’

Full story

11 Stone Buildings, June 2015

Source: www.11sb.com

FCA to consult on issue of unsolicited marketing in consumer credit market this summer – OUT-LAW.com

‘The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is to consult on the issue of unsolicited marketing by consumer credit firms this summer, according to an answer given in the UK parliament.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 1st July 2015

Source: www.out-law.com

Record PPI fine for Lloyds knocks 12% off Horta-Osório’s bonus – The Guardian

‘Lloyds Banking Group has docked £350,000 from the bonus of its boss António Horta-Osório after being hit with a £117m fine for unacceptable handling of compensation claims for payment protection insurance.’

Full story

The Guardian, 5th June 2015

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Banks face bigger PPI mis-selling bill as regulator considers compensation rules – The Guardian

‘Banks could face a bigger bill for mis-selling payment protection insurance after the City regulator said it was considering new rules on how customers should be compensated.’

Full story

The Guardian, 27th May 2015

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Credit Hire Simplified? – Zenith PI Blog

Posted May 21st, 2015 in appeals, consumer credit, damages, news, rent by sally

‘In cases where the hirer of a car on credit terms is not impecunious, we thought we knew where we stood after Dimond v Lovell [2001] 1AC 384. The Claimant was entitled to recover the ‘spot rate’ or, as the Court of Appeal in Pattni v First Leicester Buses Ltd [2012] RTR 17 insisted, ‘basic hire rate’ or BHR. In Burdis v Livsey [2003] QB 36, three possible ways of calculating the basic hire rate were considered and indeed that consideration was repeated by Aikens LJ in Pattni. Both the Court of Appeal in Burdis and the Court of Appeal in Pattni rejected the mode of calculation of applying a reasonable discount to the credit hire rate charged. That left two methods of calculation. The first, which was not favoured by the Court of Appeal in Burdis, was to break down the charge made by the credit hire company and remove the additional elements from the claim in respect of credit, claim handling and delivery &c. The Court of Appeal in Burdis thought that the cost of working all that out might well be disproportionate. The court in Pattni, however, considered that where the actual credit hire company which had hired the replacement car to the Claimant, disclosed the BHR for that type of car in that area at that time, that might well be the best mode of calculation.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 20th May 2015

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

BIG News In Credit Hire – The Court of Appeal rules that recoverable BHR for Claimant will be the lowest reasonable rate charged by comparable hire companies – Zenith PI Blog

Posted March 17th, 2015 in appeals, consumer credit, insurance, news, rent by sally

‘Traditionally, when assessing recoverable rates, credit hire companies have argued that where a range of comparable basic hire rates (BHR) can be shown from other companies, some of which are higher than the credit hire rate claimed, the Claimant’s credit hire rate should be awarded in full.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 16th March 2015

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Bar Council in deal with credit specialist to finance fees – Legal Futures

Posted March 10th, 2015 in barristers, consumer credit, fees, news by tracey

‘The Bar Council has joined forces with a legal credit finance specialist to enable direct access barristers to offer payment plans to their clients.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 10th March 2015

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

No duty on solicitors to check credit status of parties, High Court rules – Legal Futures

Posted March 5th, 2015 in consumer credit, law firms, news, solicitors by tracey

‘Solicitors are not under a general duty to check the credit status of parties in a commercial transaction unless instructed to, the High Court has ruled.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 4th March 2015

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance Ltd and another – WLR Daily

Posted November 18th, 2014 in appeals, consumer credit, disclosure, insurance, law reports, Supreme Court by sally

Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance Ltd and another [2014] UKSC 61; [2014] WLR (D) 487

‘An agreement for payment protection insurance was unfair within the meaning of section 140A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, as inserted, when the debtor had not been told, before concluding the agreement, that over 70% of the one-off £5,780 premium would be used to pay commission to various parties.’

WLR Daily, 12th November 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Plevin (Respondent) v Paragon Personal Finance Limited (Appellant) – Supreme Court

Posted November 18th, 2014 in appeals, consumer credit, disclosure, insurance, law reports, Supreme Court by sally

Plevin (Respondent) v Paragon Personal Finance Limited (Appellant) [2014] UKSC 61 (YouTube)

Supreme Court, 12th November 2014

Source: www.youtube.com/user/UKSupremeCourt

New payday loan rules to cap fees, total cost and default charges – The Guardian

Posted November 11th, 2014 in consumer credit, consumer protection, fees, financial regulation, interest, news by michael

‘The UK’s financial watchdog is clamping down on payday loans, with new rules to ensure that borrowers are never forced to repay more than twice the sum of their original loan.’

Full story

The Guardian, 11th November 2014

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Borrower wins court reprieve over £13,000 debt due to ‘illegible documents’ – Daily Telegraph

Posted July 17th, 2014 in consumer credit, debts, documents, news by tracey

‘ When Harry Moore was taken to court over spiralling credit card debts, he faced losing both his home and business. Mr Moore, 43, had built up a balance of more than £13,000 on an MBNA credit card, and had failed to meet repayments. His debts were passed from MBNA to a debt recovery agency, Hillesden Securities, which in November 2013 took him to court. But the case was thrown out – because the orginal agreement was “impossible to read”.’

Full story

Daily Telegraph, 16th July 2014

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

FCA imposes cap on payday loans – The Guardian

Posted July 15th, 2014 in consumer credit, financial regulation, interest, news by tracey

‘The cap proposed by the Financial Conduct Authority means that if someone borrows £100 from a payday lender and pays it back within the agreed 30 days, they would pay a maximum of £24 in charges. Fees for late payment would be capped at £15, with a total price cap of 100% of the original loan to stop default charges spiralling out of control.’

Full story

The Guardian, 15th july 2014

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Scotland and another v British Credit Trust Ltd – WLR Daily

Scotland and another v British Credit Trust Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 790; [2014] WLR (D) 252

‘When determining whether negotiations between a debtor and a supplier were “antecedent negotiations” within section 56(1)(c) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, so that the supplier was deemed to have been acting as an agent of the creditor, the court had to inquire whether all the negotiations formed part of one transaction as a matter of fact.’

WLR Daily, 10th June 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Claims against banks for negligent credit references? The possible impact of the Durkin decision – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted June 6th, 2014 in banking, consumer credit, economic loss, negligence, news by sally

‘Professionals in all walks of life are frequently asked to give references in respect of people or organisations. A negligently given reference may cause the recipient who relies on it or the person the subject of it to suffer pure economic loss in respect of which they will want to recover damages. In Durkin v DSG Retail Limited [2014] 1 W.L.R. 1148, the Supreme Court has, in a couple of short paragraphs, given a timely reminder of the pitfalls than may await anyone, in particular banks and other lenders, who gives a negligent reference.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 21st May 2014

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk