FFS FINANCE SOUTH AFRICA t/a FORD CREDIT v VAN DER WESTHUIZEN

This case is another case following the growing trend in our courts which confirms that a consumer is not in willful default of his/her debt review order if the PDA fails to make payments to the creditors.

http://jordaanattorneys.co.za/Court-Cases/Ffs-Finance-South-Africa-v-Van-Der-Westhuizen/

What is debt counselling or debt review?

What steps do I need to take to apply for debt counselling or debt review?

Collett v Firstrand Bank Limited - Termination of Debt Review

In this case the Appeal Court considered the question whether or not a credit provider can terminate the debt review process and thus exclude his debt from debt counselling after a court application has been issued. The court found that after the 60 days have lapsed a credit provider can indeed terminate the debt review process.

In practice however very few credit providers proceed to terminate if a consumer is making regular debt review payments. The act has also been amended to ensure that a credit provider cannot terminate once a court application has been filed. This amendment has however not come into effect as of yet.

Read more at http://www.jordaanattorneys.co.za/Court-Cases/Collett-v-Firstrand-Bank/

Nedbank v Thompson - South Gauteng High Court

In this case the High Court dealt with the fact where a Consumer has made his monthly payments to the PDA but the PDA did not pay the creditors correctly. The bank argued that the PDA is an agent of the consumer and the consumer is therefore liable for any act or ommission of the PDA.

The High Court disagreed and found that there is no agreement between the PDA and the Consumer. The High Court therefore found that the Consumer is not liable for the PDA's mistakes and therefore the consumer was not in willful default of the debt review court order.

Read more at

http://www.jordaanattorneys.co.za/Court-Cases/Nedbank-v-Thompson/

Sebola v Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd.

In this case the Constitutional Court found that a credit provider has to deliver the notice in terms of Section 129 of the National Credit Act in such a way that delivery can be proven. Consequently most credit providers are delivering the notice by Sheriff. The purpose of the Notice is to advise consumers of their rights to apply for debt counselling or debt review at a debt counsellor.

Read more at 

http://www.jordaanattorneys.co.za/Court-Cases/Sebola-v-Standard-Bank/

How to return a car in terms of the Consumer Protection Act.

What happens if I bought a car which is defective or you are not satisfied with?

The Consumer Protection Act affords a consumer to return a product which is defective within six months after date of purchase for a refund.

When you buy a car however, the car is purchased from the dealer by the bank who becomes the owner. You purchase the car from the bank. To whom must the car now be returned?

This is the question the Cape High Court had to deal with recently in the matter of MFC v BOTHA.

In short the court found that the bank cannot be regarded as a supplier and therefore the vehicle cannot be returned to the bank. Both the bank and the consumer are regarded as consumers.

The court did not elaborate on the procedure to be followed as the six-month period had lapsed by the time the case was heard.

It would however be advisable to return the vehicle to the dealer and contact your bank with the details. The bank will then have to claim the purchase price from the dealer to settle your account.

For more details please visit our website at www.jordaanattorneys.co.za.