Tweet
we all know when a creditor terminates an agreement for say hire purchase of a car for failure to make payments,
the creditor will go for the full amount outstanding of all contractual sums due
If the debtor is in arrears, and the creditor terminates, and the debtor willingly hands the goods back, the creditor is no worse off than they would have been, had the debtor terminated. They would therefore be compensated adequately by the amount specified in ss. 99 & 100.
The reasonable conclusion, and the key argument is that ss.99 and 100 set out the maximum sum recoverable by the creditor on termination, regardless of who terminates. This limitation of liability is explicit where the debtor terminates. Where the creditor terminates, the limitation may not be explicit, and it may rely on law outside the Consumer Credit Act, but there is a limit on liability nevertheless.
SO BY WHAT AUTHORITY CAN THE CREDITOR DEMAND SUMS NOT YET DUE WHEN THEY DO A REPOSESSION, when all they are entitled to would be the 50 % figure
demanding sums not yet due would be classed as a penalty clause in my opinion
so by what authority under case/statute legislation can the creditor on termination demand sums not yet due
i realise this is heavy statute law and i would value comments from our more enlightened members
any chance of putting a h for hire purchase as thread tital instead of kire purchase
the creditor will go for the full amount outstanding of all contractual sums due
If the debtor is in arrears, and the creditor terminates, and the debtor willingly hands the goods back, the creditor is no worse off than they would have been, had the debtor terminated. They would therefore be compensated adequately by the amount specified in ss. 99 & 100.
The reasonable conclusion, and the key argument is that ss.99 and 100 set out the maximum sum recoverable by the creditor on termination, regardless of who terminates. This limitation of liability is explicit where the debtor terminates. Where the creditor terminates, the limitation may not be explicit, and it may rely on law outside the Consumer Credit Act, but there is a limit on liability nevertheless.
SO BY WHAT AUTHORITY CAN THE CREDITOR DEMAND SUMS NOT YET DUE WHEN THEY DO A REPOSESSION, when all they are entitled to would be the 50 % figure
demanding sums not yet due would be classed as a penalty clause in my opinion
so by what authority under case/statute legislation can the creditor on termination demand sums not yet due
i realise this is heavy statute law and i would value comments from our more enlightened members
any chance of putting a h for hire purchase as thread tital instead of kire purchase
