If you have signed a credit agreement with a skills course company and a couple of months later the company goes into administration, is the finance contract still legally binding with whoever takes over the company?
I would think the contract is binding if you are going to continue to get what you have paid for or if you have already received it and are paying in arrears. If you aren't going to get what you paid for then how can the contract be binding as it has been broken by failure to supply.
For ease of my brian working I have assumed that the OP is wanting the skills course and paid the finance company. If I'm wrong please let me know :)
The finance contract might have nothing to do with the supply of services company in this case.
If the credit company has already paid the establishment they will still want their money back and the contract is with the OP not the company.
If while in administration a new owner can be found it is likely that they would still have to provide the skills course that has been paid for. It just depends on the terms of the takeover or buyout as it were.
Are you asking if the new company has to provide the same course that has been paid for or if the finance contract with the OP still has to be paid for?
Its a friend of mine who on a whim (silly I know but he was suffering a bereavement and his s/employed business was not doing well). This was in December 2013 and he regrets doing this and was wondering I there was any way to get out of the contract. The APR is a whopping 35% and the payments are crippling him!
If they are providing the course then he is getting what he paid for and so in my opinion cannot get out of the finance agreement just because he can't afford the repayments.
He might be better off aking them if he can get out of the agreement or can extend the payment plan for longer at a lower rate and hope they are forthcoming and helpfull.
A very expensive lession in not jumping before the skip rope swings round.
lthough I fogot to ask... what does it say in the finance contract? Dependant on what that says it could be that ents to provider (not the finance company)are staged so might be able to sort something!!
If he is dissatisfied with the course material then he might have a trading standards issue but if the the company supplying the course has gone out of business, he is out of luck there. Did he sign a separate finance agreement? ie could he have had the course without the finance agreement?
The finance agreement is with the same company who offered the course. My friend was never given the opportunity to get finance separate. If he had he could of got a far better apr than 35%…
but did he have to have finance at all? If he could have afforded it, could he have paid up front? It sounds a bit like a possibility of mis-selling but would need trading standards advice.
I would have lent him the money rather than him paying over £3k in interest. o in theory no he didn't need the finance. Are we best writing to trading standards?
Also the course he wants is in solar energy but they said he has to do the electrical course first. I have just looked at his correspondence from them and it lists the course and the thing it will be doing, and its all electrics so it looks like if he was then to do the solar energy he would have to fork out a few extra grand for that!
So are you saying that he wasn't required by the company to take the finance in order to have the course and that he took it because he couldn't afford to pay up front? Its worth checking with trading standards but sadly I suspect he is stuffed. Does the paperwork have the APR and interest rates on it and did he get a 7 day cooling off period?
He wasn't given the choice as to whether he wanted the finance or not, it was a matter of take the course and take the finance. Yes there was a 7 day cooling off and it does show the apr.