Re: Voluntary Termination of Car Finance
Hi Rob, [MENTION=71570]R0b[/MENTION]
Had another reply, copied and pasted below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With reference to your e-mail dated 16th December 2015. Please see below, as you stated,
"total price " means the total sum payable by the debtor under a hire-purchase agreement or conditional sale agreement, including any sum payable on the exercise of an option to purchase, but excluding any sum payable as a penalty or as compensation or damages for a breach of the agreement;
excluding any sum payable as a penalty or as compensation or damages for breach of the agreement. You were in Breach of your agreement with our client
by exceeding your agreed mileage.
Section ‘189’ of the CCA explains definitions within the CCA. As stated in the Act. Please see below.
(1) In this act, unless the context otherwise requires---
Your terms and conditions specifically section ‘excess mileage charge’, ‘The basic mileage is the permitted mileage under the terms of the agreement, calculated by multiplying the basic annual mileage shown in the mileage details section by the number of whole and/or part years that have passed since this agreement date, up to the date of calculation. Excess mileage calculations are based upon total paid months, allocated in monthly intervals, not a daily calculation up to the point of return (not how long you have the vehicle). You had made a total of 31 payments throughout your agreement.
You are liable for the excess mileage. I feel you need to obtain a second opinion on your legal rights.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So basically, he's arguing that I am still liable? Is this not a penalty clause though? If it was a contractual term shouldn't it be proportionate...so for example if the car had done less miles the creditor should issue a rebate at the same rate? This wasn't in the contract so should be classed as a penalty and unenforceable? Or am I barking up the wrong tree? It's something I read on a site whilst looking into this initially?
Hi Rob, [MENTION=71570]R0b[/MENTION]
Had another reply, copied and pasted below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With reference to your e-mail dated 16th December 2015. Please see below, as you stated,
"total price " means the total sum payable by the debtor under a hire-purchase agreement or conditional sale agreement, including any sum payable on the exercise of an option to purchase, but excluding any sum payable as a penalty or as compensation or damages for a breach of the agreement;
excluding any sum payable as a penalty or as compensation or damages for breach of the agreement. You were in Breach of your agreement with our client
by exceeding your agreed mileage.
Section ‘189’ of the CCA explains definitions within the CCA. As stated in the Act. Please see below.
(1) In this act, unless the context otherwise requires---
Your terms and conditions specifically section ‘excess mileage charge’, ‘The basic mileage is the permitted mileage under the terms of the agreement, calculated by multiplying the basic annual mileage shown in the mileage details section by the number of whole and/or part years that have passed since this agreement date, up to the date of calculation. Excess mileage calculations are based upon total paid months, allocated in monthly intervals, not a daily calculation up to the point of return (not how long you have the vehicle). You had made a total of 31 payments throughout your agreement.
You are liable for the excess mileage. I feel you need to obtain a second opinion on your legal rights.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So basically, he's arguing that I am still liable? Is this not a penalty clause though? If it was a contractual term shouldn't it be proportionate...so for example if the car had done less miles the creditor should issue a rebate at the same rate? This wasn't in the contract so should be classed as a penalty and unenforceable? Or am I barking up the wrong tree? It's something I read on a site whilst looking into this initially?
Comment