Moneybarn Voluntary Termination

[cari]

Hi,

I am looking for some advice, please. Before I start, I would like to be open and say that I am well aware of the situation I've got myself into, but I would appreciate others' thoughts.

I took out a finance agreement with Moneybarn for the amount of £15,518.00 on the 28/12/2023, with an APR of 39.90% over 59 monthly payments. The total payment over the full agreement is £32,147.92. Monthly payments were £544.88.

Due to a change in circumstances (Please note, I haven't made any payments towards the agreement; I cancelled before the first direct debit payment was due.), I submitted my Voluntary Termination on the 12/02/2024. I received an email regarding BCA (British Car Auctions) collecting the vehicle. I called them and arranged the collection. They collected the vehicle on the 19/02/2024, and I received a copy of the condition report with no issues reported.

The car has now been sold, as I can see it's back online at a dealership for more than the price I paid for it. However, this is what I don't understand: Moneybarn is saying that after the HALF RULE has been applied, I need to pay them £16,073.96, even though they've taken the car back and sold it. Is this correct? Shouldn't the money from what the car was sold for be deducted from the £16,073.96 and I pay the difference?

I am getting absolutely nowhere with Moneybarn. I've sent numerous emails, been on the phone to them, sent messages on the online portal, and am getting absolutely nowhere. I've been told I'll get a call back from the assets team, which I haven't received to this day.

I understand I agreed to it, but is it right that I was provided this finance with only being asked for a copy of my driving license? I didn't provide any bank statements or payslips.

Advice would be much appreciated.

[R0b]

Hello

The general rule for VT is that you owe 50% of the total price payable however there is an exception to that rule in the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Section 100(3) of the CCA says:

If in any action the court is satisfied that a sum less than the amount specified in subsection (1) would be equal to the loss sustained by the creditor in consequence of the termination of the agreement by the debtor, the court may make an order for the payment of that sum in lieu of the amount specified in subsection (1).

In other words, whereas Section 100(1) tells you the VT rule is 50% for liability, section 100(3) can displace that rule if the creditor sustained less of a loss e.g. if the vehicle sold for more than expected and therefore they would get in excess of one half. It's an untested point as far as I'm aware as I have not found an relevant court cases applying this rule.

I understand I agreed to it, but is it right that I was provided this finance with only being asked for a copy of my driving license? I didn't provide any bank statements or payslips.

You may have a case for an unaffordability claim on the basis they did not carry out sufficient checks to ensure you were able to make the repayments over the agreed loan period. For example, if they failed to ask you questions about your current income and any outgoings or they knew you had a poor credit history but continued anyway in ignorance. This is not my area of expertise but you could seek to make a formal complaint to Moneybarn, and then proceed with a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service for a final decison - that may prompt moneybarn to back down or wait to see the outcome of the FOS decision. You may want to get some assistance if possible regarding this via Citizens Advice or Debt Change or National Debt Line for further advice.