Tweet
Hello again, some of you may remember that I've posted previously in relation to a debt of my husbands that we believe is statute barred but Lowell insist that it runs from the default debt. (Seems to be their default position as they are arguing it with one of mine as well!)
Hubby sent a SAR to Welcome Car Finance (original creditor - HP agreement). They had until 16 March to send docs but sent it 18th and it was received today.
On the terms of the agreement, it states (Clause 7) "If you fail to pay any of the payments in full on the date when it is due...we will be entitled but not bound to terminate this agreement by notice to you".
The first missed payment was in May 2007 so I've read it that this would be when they would be entitled to (or have 'cause of action' to) terminate the agreement, even though they did not do so until October 2007 (when default notice was served and not rectified).
Our argument has been that the limitation period started running from the first missed payment (but wanted the agreement to check). This would make it 6 years 3 weeks before payment to Lowell was made (13 June 2013). Lowell argue that it runs from the default date (9 October 2007) which obviously takes it under the 6 years.
I don't think I know what to do anymore with this. Given the wording in the terms, would we still be good to rely on SB or shall we just give in and offer £x amount per month for an indeterminate amount of time?
In relation to my debt, mine was an old cap one account, no payment made for 6 years 3 months and 3 weeks from 1st missed payment so I don't want to give in on that one so easily! But hubby's worries him.
I know I've asked for (and received) help before (thanks!) on this issue but now we have the exact wording from the t's & c's i'd be grateful if someone could help clarify if position changed or not.
Thank you again in advance
Amy
Hubby sent a SAR to Welcome Car Finance (original creditor - HP agreement). They had until 16 March to send docs but sent it 18th and it was received today.
On the terms of the agreement, it states (Clause 7) "If you fail to pay any of the payments in full on the date when it is due...we will be entitled but not bound to terminate this agreement by notice to you".
The first missed payment was in May 2007 so I've read it that this would be when they would be entitled to (or have 'cause of action' to) terminate the agreement, even though they did not do so until October 2007 (when default notice was served and not rectified).
Our argument has been that the limitation period started running from the first missed payment (but wanted the agreement to check). This would make it 6 years 3 weeks before payment to Lowell was made (13 June 2013). Lowell argue that it runs from the default date (9 October 2007) which obviously takes it under the 6 years.
I don't think I know what to do anymore with this. Given the wording in the terms, would we still be good to rely on SB or shall we just give in and offer £x amount per month for an indeterminate amount of time?
In relation to my debt, mine was an old cap one account, no payment made for 6 years 3 months and 3 weeks from 1st missed payment so I don't want to give in on that one so easily! But hubby's worries him.
I know I've asked for (and received) help before (thanks!) on this issue but now we have the exact wording from the t's & c's i'd be grateful if someone could help clarify if position changed or not.
Thank you again in advance
Amy
Comment