Santander UK Plc v Harrison & Anor

Santander UK Plc v Harrison & Anor

Capitalisation of arrears did not constitute provision of credit in the form of a cash loan under the Consumer Credit Act 1974; therefore, the loan agreement remained unregulated and enforceable, and the bank retained title to sue. Assignment and securitisation did not affect the outcome. Costs order in favour of the bank was appropriate.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Santander UK Plc; Defendant/appellant: Keith Harrison; Defendant/appellant: Susan Patricia Harrison
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal From Preliminary Determination, Permission to Appeal Sought and Partially Granted
Outcome
Appeal dismissed on capitalisation issue; permission to appeal refused on all other issues.
Legal Topics
Capitalisation of Arrears, Securitisation, Unfair Relationship, Assignment of Debt, Costs
Consumer Credit Property Law Civil Procedure Capitalisation of Arrears Securitisation Unfair Relationship Assignment of Debt Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Santander UK Plc

Claimant/respondent

Keith Harrison

Defendant/appellant

Susan Patricia Harrison

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal From Preliminary Determination, Permission to Appeal Sought and Partially Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether capitalisation of arrears constituted provision of credit in the form of a cash loan under Consumer Credit Act 1974
  2. 2 Whether the loan agreement became regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 after capitalisation
  3. 3 Whether assignment of the loan agreement affected the bank's title to sue

Ratio Decidendi

Capitalisation of arrears did not constitute provision of credit in the form of a cash loan under the Consumer Credit Act 1974; therefore, the loan agreement remained unregulated and enforceable, and the bank retained title to sue. Assignment and securitisation did not affect the outcome. Costs order in favour of the bank was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed on capitalisation issue; permission to appeal refused on all other issues.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted on capitalisation issue but appeal dismissed.
  • Permission to appeal refused on securitisation, unfair relationship, and costs issues.