(8) These different areas may summarize that this agreement is a regulated agreement within the meaning of Section 8 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. A regulated agreement is only executed properly if the signed document contains all the prescribed conditions: Section 61.1(a). One of the prescribed conditions is the “credit limit”: the consumer credit regulations (agreements) of 1983, Regulation 6 and List 6, para. 3. Non-indications of all the prescribed terms of the agreement have the effect of excluding the court from the application of the agreement under Section 127 (3). In the absence of judicial enforcement, the agreement is totally unenforceable: section 65, paragraph 1.b), a statement that the credit limit is set from time to time by the lender as part of the agreement and that it will notify the debtor; (4) A personal credit contract is an agreement governed by Section 8 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Paragraph 60, paragraph 1, gives the Secretary of State the power to adopt rules on the form and content of documents that embody regulated agreements: (11) There is only the question of whether, in the event of actual construction, the credit limit clause is included in the agreement. The recorder, Michael Douglas QC, framed it in paragraph 33 of his judgment in a passage that contrasts with the provisions of Charts 1 and 6 approved by the Court of Appeal in England in hurstanger Ltd/Wilson [2007] 1WLR 2351 in 2356-7, para. 11: (15), because I would consider condition 3 as a possibility of determining the credit limit. , which is sufficient to solve the problem and there is no need to further examine whether condition 3 could also indicate the credit limit. Paragraph 8, paragraph 2, of Schedule 1 of the 1983 Regulation provides that the “credit limit” can be expressed as a declaration, that the credit limit is set from time to time by the lender as part of the agreement and that it will be communicated to the debtor.

This is of some importance, since that is indeed what the third condition does. Application of the principle of the legal concept that the legislature, if it uses the same language in different parts of a statute, intends that the language is of uniform importance, and in the same way, if it uses the same language in different parts of a legal instrument, so that the Secretary of State might intend to have a uniform meaning. There is therefore some strength in interpreting the term “credit limit” in Schedule 6 in the same way as in Schedule 1, indicating that the credit limit is set from time to time by the lender as part of the agreement and that it notifies the debtor. Similarly, the Secretary of State would have expressly admitted it if the “credit limit” had a similar meaning in both timelines. However, there is no need for a final opinion on this subject, as I have in any case considered condition 3 to be an opportunity to determine the credit limit. (2) In the agreement between the parties, a “credit limit” was referred to in three cases. In Condition 1, entitled “Definitions,” the agreement stated: “71. I come to the provision of section 127, paragraph 3.

The Consumer Credit Act 1974 contains many requirements regarding the form and content of regulated agreements.