header-logo header-logo

29 April 2010 / Paul Heeley
Issue: 7415 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Time to wipe the slate clean?

Has the Supreme Court closed the s 18 door? asks Paul Heeley

When is an unregulated agreement not an unregulated agreement? Answer: when it is really a number of smaller (regulated) agreements rolled into one. And so says s 18 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (‘the Act’) which concerns Multiple Agreements. But while this is no new principle of consumer credit, lenders made aware by their advisers of the recent potentially cataclysmic Heath consumer credit case can relax now that the Supreme Court has refused permission to appeal to a borrower who sought to avoid her loan by arguing that one of the most common types of credit arrangement, a re-mortgage, was in fact a Multiple Agreement. Why the relief? Well, had the Court of Appeal’s decision been overturned it is anyone’s guess how many lenders would have suffered a major financial loss overnight.

The 1974 Act has had its fair share of criticism over the years for its drafting. Thirty-five years after receiving Royal Assent it is quite astonishing that

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll