I cannot believe that they can claim the money and then demand full payment saying that they pay that back to the BIS as they are repaid. If that is the case why the need for a CCj rather than an amicable repayment schedule as was offered. If that was the case I could actually see the benefit for all as the bank don't lose out and the customer remains liable but at an affordable level. However this isn't what it says. It doesn't say that the bank can reclaim and then still pursue you and then repay it as they see fit to the BIS. It says they can claim the 75% once all other avenues are exhausted.. They have 2 repayment options active concurrently when one should only be implemented in absence of the other. Well that's how I understood it.
However they now want the full amount ' forthwith' and I think this may be because we asked for a variance as they had 75% repaid. The Tines I think triggered the question of interest because we discovered that they were in fact adding interest to the CCJ amount so it was going up but since the TImes queries they have said they agree not to charge interest. Very kind considering they have 75% sat in an account somewhere gaining interest......
However they now want the full amount ' forthwith' and I think this may be because we asked for a variance as they had 75% repaid. The Tines I think triggered the question of interest because we discovered that they were in fact adding interest to the CCJ amount so it was going up but since the TImes queries they have said they agree not to charge interest. Very kind considering they have 75% sat in an account somewhere gaining interest......
Upvote
0