Legal Updates

Order for Sale Threshold Limit Confirmed at £1,000

By earlier this month approving the Charging Orders (Orders for Sale: Financial Thresholds) Regulations 2012, the Government has confirmed that enforcement of a charging order is permissible where the debt (arising under a CCA regulated agreement) is £1,000 or above.

Holdstock v Endeavour - “Unfair Relationships” are still an issue

The recent decision by the Court of Appeal to award permission to appeal in Holdstock v Endeavour Personal Finance Limited may mean that its earlier decision in Harrison v Blackhorse is not the last word on the “unfair relationship” provisions (introduced by the Consumer Credit Act 2006) and in particular their application to PPI disputes.

BORROWERS NEED TO BE PREPARED

The Court of Appeal has recently suggested that borrowers sometimes may be faced with the same obligation as lenders to ensure their evidence is up to date and complete if they want to rely on the Administration of Justice Act.

Notice of Assignment

Debt purchasers will have breathed a sigh of relief after the judgment in Jones v Link Financial Limited which confirmed their right as a “creditor” to take recovery action on a purchased account which was “regulated” by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (the “CCA”). To get the ball rolling and actually start the account rehabilitation/collection processes, a Notice of Assignment of the debt has to be given to the account holder.

Challenges for Debt Purchasers

Debt purchasers are vital stakeholders in the debt recovery process. In many respects they face exactly the same challenges as original lenders whilst needing to generate an early (incoming) flow of cash to justify the outlay on the debt purchase itself.

PPI - BEHIND THE HEADLINES

Withdrawal of the challenge to the Court of Appeal decision in Harrison v Black Horse Limited will have a significant effect on court proceedings alleging PPI mis-selling.

LONG LIFE POSSESSION ORDERS

For how long can a lender rely on a possession order?

SECTION 61 IS STILL ALIVE!

The landmark decision of HSBC Bank v Carey provided much welcome relief to lenders who in preceding years had been subject to a deluge of requests (pursuant to Section 78 of the CCA) for credit agreements and subsequent court actions seeking declarations of un-enforceability once the 12 working days had elapsed. Together with the “overdraft fee” litigation this brought lenders into the previously unknown territory of hostile litigation with a substantial number of its customers.

DEFAULT NOTICES DEMAND DILIGENCE (Abridged version)

Recent Court decisions have once again placed the spotlight on default notices – do the contents comply with the CCA and have they been served in sufficient time? As far back as 1998 the Court of Appeal (Woodchester Leasing Management Services Limited v Swain) ruled that a default notice needed to accurately state the amount of the arrears as the customer “needs to know precisely what he or she is said to have done wrong and what he or she needs to do to put matters right”. The ruling was accompanied by an unequivocal warning that lenders will not be afforded sympathy/leniency as they have resources to ensure the information on default notices is accurate.

CHANGES TO CHARGING ORDERS

“Lenders need to review their Charging Order strategy in order to maximise enforcement/recovery opportunities”.


Our Core Values