Cause of Action Discussion

[jon1965]

Re: Cause of Action Discussion

Amethyst
Not necessarily. First missed payment only triggers demand if the contract allows it. Not cut and dried.

[Amethyst]

Re: Cause of Action Discussion

I think you agree ( Jon and Charharp ) and it's a case of misreading one another's posts.



Jon - '' Limitations starts from the point they can [....demand full repayment....] not when they do ''

Charharp - '' Creditor is free to demand full repayment after one missed payment. It most likely won't but this isn't the point, it's free to do so and that's when limitations starts. ''

Which do say the same thing - limitations starts from the point the creditor CAN demand full repayment by virtue of the terms of the agreement, whether they do or not is irrelevant.

Re: Cause of Action Discussion

Give it up Char
Do you even read the terms that I posted
Did you read the NDL fact sheet
Do you have ANY evidence that your assertion is true

Limitations starts from the point they can not when they do

I would ignore him jon as I have.

EDIT ....

[charharp]

Re: Cause of Action Discussion

EDIT ..........

Your last like about limitations is exactly what I said.


EDIT .........

[jon1965]

Re: Cause of Action Discussion

Creditor is free to demand full repayment after one missed payment. It most likely won't but this isn't the point, it's free to do so and that's when limitations starts.

Give it up Char
Do you even read the terms that I posted
Did you read the NDL fact sheet
Do you have ANY evidence that your assertion is true

Limitations starts from the point they can not when they do

[Amethyst]

Re: Cause of Action Discussion

No you do not own the car until the last payment is made and until recently a transfer fee is paid , this transfers the title, now the transfer is automatic on the last payment.

Thank you makes more sense.

[charharp]

Re: Cause of Action Discussion

Creditor is free to demand full repayment after one missed payment. It most likely won't but this isn't the point, it's free to do so and that's when limitations starts.

Re: Cause of Action Discussion

Therein lies the question doesn't it. The cause of action wouldn't arise until the date I don't pay my bill.



)

Well no not really, it would arise when the terms and conditions said the creditor was able to demand you repay all you owe on the card, not just your missing payment.

Although technically missing a single payment would be a cause of action for recovery of that single payment.

[charharp]

Re: Cause of Action Discussion

I will leave it to Andy though as he has a better grasp of the terminology than I do .
I bet your red pen has been in overdrive

HahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahaHahahahaha hahahahaha

Good one Jon.

[jon1965]

Re: Cause of Action Discussion

Amethyst my 2 cents worth

Most of the people we see on sites like this and the others who are struggling with debt have been making odd payments here and there or have been in an arrangement. Most already have defaults on the credit file. In those cases then yes it is last payment or acknowledgement that sets or resets the SB clock.

If however the account is live it is a whole different ballgame. I have put some terms up on the top of the thread which really shows what they need to do to reclaim the full amount. Also looking at the NDL factsheet on limitations gives you some idea. I will leave it to Andy though as he has a better grasp of the terminology than I do .
I bet your red pen has been in overdrive

[charharp]

Re: Cause of Action Discussion

On the credit card issue, COA would be first missed payment and the clock will be reset by any future payments or acknowledgement. So limitations would only be from last payment if one was made after the COA otherwise it will be date of first missed payment.

Re: Cause of Action Discussion

Therein lies the question doesn't it. The cause of action wouldn't arise until the date I don't pay my bill.



Re the HP part.... How does the title pass after 2/3rds of the instalments have been made ? or am I on the entire wrong track ?

(as you can tell I have never had a car loan/finance/HP etc so it isn't something I am familiar with at all)

No idea never heard of that one, wrong track I think

Re: Cause of Action Discussion

The bit on HP I have trouble with, is what are the payments after the 2/3rds of the 'purchase price', are they loan repayments ? On (some) HP once you have paid over 2/3rds you 'own' the car rather than 'hire' it.... so what are you paying, the hire must have turned into a loan at some point ? Hire.....Purchase ..... ?

No you do not own the car until the last payment is made and until recently a transfer fee is paid , this transfers the title, now the transfer is automatic on the last payment.

The rules regarding repossessing the car are that after one third payment of the total credit price the owner cannot re posses the car without a court order,
After on half of the total credit price has been paid the hirer can return the car without any further charge and just walk away, this is voluntary termination.

If the hirer defaults the car is re possessed and sold the product of the sale is knocked of the total credit price and the hirer owes the balance on the loan. In this respect it is no different to a secured loan.

This applies to regulated agreements of course, but the conditions in the hart case are the same regarding the termination payments under the contract.

[charharp]

Re: Cause of Action Discussion

Therein lies the question doesn't it. The cause of action wouldn't arise until the date I don't pay my bill.



Re the HP part.... How does the title pass after 2/3rds of the instalments have been made ? or am I on the entire wrong track ?

(as you can tell I have never had a car loan/finance/HP etc so it isn't something I am familiar with at all)

Im not sure about this 2/3 things but my guess would be the customer becomes the owner of the car and the final 1/3 is provided as a loan secured on the car.

Ignore what Einstein says it's 90-100% nonsense.

[Amethyst]

Re: Cause of Action Discussion

Therein lies the question doesn't it. The cause of action wouldn't arise until the date I don't pay my bill.



Re the HP part....

HP/ conditional sale = "In practice this works with the retailer working as an agent on behalf of the creditor. The retailer or agent will supply the goods to the consumer but the title of the goods will be transferred to the creditor. The creditor will then pay the agent for the transfer of title. The consumer will be able to use the goods will they continue to make the periodic payments under the conditional sale agreement to the creditor. Once the final instalment has been paid by the consumer the title in the goods will pass from the creditor to the consumer".

How does the title pass after 2/3rds of the instalments have been made ? or am I on the entire wrong track ?

(as you can tell I have never had a car loan/finance/HP etc so it isn't something I am familiar with at all)