Victory for victim of repossession
November 23, 2009 by admin
Filed under News, News-Loans
A man who was facing repossession by the provider of secured loans has enjoyed victory recently, after taking court action that resulted in the lender being unable to take repossession action against him for five years and having to cut the amount that he is repaying each month on his loan dramatically.
The firm will also be charging no further interest on the loan. Peter Bentley, a carpenter, had taken out the loan with Blemain Finance, which is a company that deals with second loans that are secured against the borrower’s home.
Bentley claimed that his contract with the lender involved a relationship that was unfair and illegal. He took out the loan for £40,000 in 2007, when his mother died and he was left to become a carer for his ill father, and therefore had to cut back his working hours.
However, due to having to cut his working hours he soon fell behind with repayments on the loan. Earlier this year the lender started chasing him for repayment of the loan, which had now reached the sum of £47,000.
Bentley said that he tried to explain to the lender what the situation was but that they were not prepared to listen. He then contacted lawyers. His lawyer said that the lender had taken advantage of him when he was at his most vulnerable and desperate, and that the firm had therefore lent the money to him irresponsibly.
In exchange for the lender agreeing to cutting repayments from £550 a month to £150 a month, not pursuing any repossession action for at least five years, and freezing interest, Bentley agreed to drop his case about the unfair relationship and irresponsible lending.
Tags: Blemain finance, secured loans, Blemain secured loans, missed repayments, Peter Bentley, BlemainAn official from Blemain said: “Mr Bentley fell behind with his loan payments. However, the matter was resolved before it went to court and we agreed to give him further time to repay what he owed. For the avoidance of doubt there has been no court decision on this case as a satisfactory arrangement was agreed.”


