Debt adverts misleading, says ASA

[Curlyben]

Loan-Free's claims were not sufficiently backed up, the ASA said

A debt management company has been told not to publish misleading adverts about the chances of people being able to write off their debts.
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) said an ad from the website Loan-Free was misleading.
It had suggested that credit card and bank debts agreed before April 2007 might not need to be repaid.
But the ASA said the company and its solicitors had failed to provide sufficient evidence to back this up.
The advert in question, published in regional newspapers, had stated: "If your credit card or loan was taken out before April 2007 it could be completely unenforceable and will not need to be repaid.
"Our solicitors can use government legislation to arrange for your outstanding balances to be written off and claim compensation for you."
The ASA decided this "was likely to mislead readers as to the likelihood of their debts being written off".

Warnings
The past year has seen a boom in the number of claims management companies trying to encourage people to challenge the legality of loan agreements which had struck before April 2007, under the old provisions of the 1974 Consumer Credit Act.
They argue that if lenders cannot prove they have stuck to the strict paperwork requirements of the 1974 law, then the debts cannot be enforced.
Firms trying to attract this sort of business have recently been warned by the Ministry of Justice, the Office of Fair Trading and the solicitors' regulatory authority not to exaggerate the chances of success.
Loan-Free, run by a business called Debt Free UK, denied its advert contained any exaggeration.
It said its advert did not promise that all debts could necessarily be written off.
The firm told the ASA that 76% of the credit card agreements, and 85% of the loan agreements, they had passed to their solicitors had breached the terms of the consumer credit act to the point where they were legally unenforceable.
However, the firm's solicitors refused to back this up to the satisfaction of the ASA.
Arguing that supplying the figures would be a breach of their obligation to maintain their clients' confidentiality, they said only that "they had successfully challenged numerous credit agreements, with balances written off and clients' credit ratings restored".
Debt Free UK was also criticised by the ASA for not making it clear in its advert that customers might have to pay fees to both the company and its solicitors.





BBC NEWS | Business | Debt adverts misleading, says ASA


Can you say CCA "loophole"...

[Amethyst]

Re: Debt adverts misleading, says ASA

If you make claims then be prepared to BACK THEM UP

[Amethyst]

Re: Debt adverts misleading, says ASA

didnt realise it was lloyds that made the complaint !!!





ASA upholds Lloyds TSB complaint against debt claim chaser

Lee Jones - 17-Jun-2009
The Advertising Standards Agency has held up a complaint from Lloyds TSB with regard to adverts by Debt Free UK, a claims firm.




Lloyds TSB complained that the adverts of Debt Free UK, a company which offer borrowers the chance to clear their secured and unsecured debts, were misleading. The bank argued that it exaggerated the likelihood of a debt being written off and also Debt Free did not make clear that fees applied to Debt Free’s services.The advert stated: "If your credit card or loan was taken out before April 2007 it could be completely unenforceable and will not need to be repaid. Our solicitors can use Government legislation to arrange for your outstanding balances to be written off and claim compensation for you without affecting your credit rating."
Debt Free argued that its advert did not exaggerate the likelihood of a debt being written off because it stated that a credit card or loan taken out before April 2007 "could be" unenforceable, not that all would be.
It also said the advert did not state or imply that the service offered by the company was provided free of charge. They said their costs varied depending on the circumstances of the client.

The ASA upheld the complaints of Lloyds TSB. It agreed that the advert was likely to mislead readers as to the likelihood of their debts being written off.
The agency also found that Debt Free could charge two sets of fees: firstly fees to obtain and assess one or more credit agreements and, secondly, fees paid to take matters forward in the event those agreements were considered potentially unenforceable. It says Debt Free did not make this clear either.
When questioned by the ASA, Debt Free said it did not know what percentage of all credit card or loan credit agreements were incorrect. However, it said that, of the credit agreements they had submitted to their solicitors, they believed approximately 76 per cent of the credit card and 85 per cent of the loan agreements had broken the terms of the Consumer Credit Act to a sufficient degree that they were legally unenforceable as defined under it.

[TUTTSI]

Re: Debt adverts misleading, says ASA

didnt realise it was lloyds that made the complaint !!!





ASA upholds Lloyds TSB complaint against debt claim chaser

Lee Jones - 17-Jun-2009
The Advertising Standards Agency has held up a complaint from Lloyds TSB with regard to adverts by Debt Free UK, a claims firm.




Lloyds TSB complained that the adverts of Debt Free UK, a company which offer borrowers the chance to clear their secured and unsecured debts, were misleading. The bank argued that it exaggerated the likelihood of a debt being written off and also Debt Free did not make clear that fees applied to Debt Free’s services.The advert stated: "If your credit card or loan was taken out before April 2007 it could be completely unenforceable and will not need to be repaid. Our solicitors can use Government legislation to arrange for your outstanding balances to be written off and claim compensation for you without affecting your credit rating."
Debt Free argued that its advert did not exaggerate the likelihood of a debt being written off because it stated that a credit card or loan taken out before April 2007 "could be" unenforceable, not that all would be.
It also said the advert did not state or imply that the service offered by the company was provided free of charge. They said their costs varied depending on the circumstances of the client.

The ASA upheld the complaints of Lloyds TSB. It agreed that the advert was likely to mislead readers as to the likelihood of their debts being written off.
The agency also found that Debt Free could charge two sets of fees: firstly fees to obtain and assess one or more credit agreements and, secondly, fees paid to take matters forward in the event those agreements were considered potentially unenforceable. It says Debt Free did not make this clear either.
When questioned by the ASA, Debt Free said it did not know what percentage of all credit card or loan credit agreements were incorrect. However, it said that, of the credit agreements they had submitted to their solicitors, they believed approximately 76 per cent of the credit card and 85 per cent of the loan agreements had broken the terms of the Consumer Credit Act to a sufficient degree that they were legally unenforceable as defined under it.

Well thank you Lloyds - what have they to hide?