Arrow Global going for CCJ

[bettyshotpot]

Re: Arrow Global going for CCJ

Page 2....

[littlebert8]

Re: Arrow Global going for CCJ

Sorry littlebert, I can't see the reference to FCA and PSD 2009 on the Arrow default notice. Although I don't think we have a copy of page 2 (the default notice has page 1 of 2 printed at the bottom)

Time to remedy is probably enough to force them to have to rectify it.

My mistake, it was the MBNA assignment letter that has the FCA letterhead.

[littlebert8]

Re: Arrow Global going for CCJ

Not sure if they can on this kind of assignment anyway, the duty to supply credit would not be transferred via the assignment. Would have to be novation.

Doesn't novation require the consent of all parties? Hence its impractical for the transfer of consumer credit agreements as you would have to obtain the consent of the customer. In the case of a live agreement, the asignee would get the right to receive payments in accordance with the original agreement, but would not be obligated to make additional advances. This certainly does happen in practice - only recently I had a letter telling me that a store card I hold was being assigned by Santander.

[Guest]

Re: Arrow Global going for CCJ

Doesn't novation require the consent of all parties? Hence its impractical for the transfer of consumer credit agreements as you would have to obtain the consent of the customer. In the case of a live agreement, the asignee would get the right to receive payments in accordance with the original agreement, but would not be obligated to make additional advances. This certainly does happen in practice - only recently I had a letter telling me that a store card I hold was being assigned by Santander.

yes that is why this cannot be, it will be under the law of property act assignment.

Assignments made this way transfer rights and entitlements under the agreement, I think the assignment says this here and leaves out the word duties.

Duties cannot be assigned, against common law, In Jones it was shown that duties under the statute can be assigned however, which enables them to send notices prescribed by it, however they cannot continue to provide duties under the contract like supply credit for instance, IMO.
This would take a novation of contract.

The FOs aply this principle on PPI refunds which have been issued on loans which have been sold, the lack of the duty to the new owner results in the refund being paid to the debtor, even though the debt has been sold.

[Amethyst]

Re: Arrow Global going for CCJ

lol indeed you are right, and considering that assignment was meant to have been done in 2007 that's a bit of a balls up xx

Right at bottom of this assignment notice.


Also wonder when Ian Worthington started working for MBNA. He became Risk Operations Manager in 2011. Edit: Double checked and he has been with MBNA since graduating in 93.

Interestingly though he is '' responsible for debt sale and debt purchaser oversight at MBNA Limited."

[Amethyst]

Re: Arrow Global going for CCJ

Page 2....

Thanks for posting that up. Hope you don't mind us all rambling on about these notices.

Looking at signatory (just as I happened to be noseying at people) of the arrow default notice you are honoured ;

Zachary Lewy - Founder and Executive Director

Zachary is Arrow Global's founder and currently serves as the Company's Executive Director leading origination, corporate development, and external relations. He has 15 years of executive experience in debt purchase, debt collections, and contact centre management. He started Arrow Global in 2005.

[Guest]

Re: Arrow Global going for CCJ

Just seems odd that they should give a remedy figure when they cannot legally remedy(even if they had the facility)

[Guest]

Re: Arrow Global going for CCJ

An additional thought. section 88 says something like if the action is taken the agreement should be as if the breach had not occurred.
The agreement was not between the new owner and the debtor when the breach occurred.

[littlebert8]

Re: Arrow Global going for CCJ

Just seems odd that they should give a remedy figure when they cannot legally remedy(even if they had the facility)

This is very much hypothetical as I'm fairly convinced that the Arrow default notice is a fabrication. But if the borrower had sent the payment required to remedy the breach, then Arrow would not be entitled to demand full payment of the outstanding balance. They would only be entitled to the installments as specified by the agreement.

[Guest]

Re: Arrow Global going for CCJ

This is very much hypothetical as I'm fairly convinced that the MBNA default notice is a fabrication. But if the borrower had sent the payment required to remedy the breach, then Arrow would not be entitled to demand full payment of the outstanding balance. They would only be entitled to the installments as specified by the agreement.

I don't think the law of assignment works that way, the duties of the lender would not be assigned, only his rights under the contract.

Also i do not think that this is what the act intended when the section was made, the agreement has been sold upon breach, for no other reason, sections 87-9s are for protection against any action by the creditor upon breach of contract, he must be given time to remedy and if he does the agreement must continue, (although the creditor may exercise his right to with-hold further credit of course)