Search results

So why is that you consider the CBA booklet referred to above - and the ING - not to be part of the terms and conditions of an actual loan contract?

So why do you think that a booklet labelled 'terms and conditions' could not form part of the credit contract for a loan?

Skirting around the questions again? Its a yes or no answer.

Please answer this question: Do you consider terms and conditions of a contract to be part of that contract?

But is it part of a contract? ie terms and conditions of a contract?

Here is another quote from the Shadow

And this??

What about this?

I think you described them above somewhere as not being part of the contract.

i think you will find death may be considered a default too - no, please don't start another thread!

Coincidently, from today's Sydney Morning Herald Quote: http://www.smh.com.au/business/rba-k...212-1szsz.html I know it concerns developers and not the NCCP but it may still be of interest.

Coincidently, from today's Sydney Morning Herald http://www.smh.com.au/business/rba-kept-bankwest-alive-20120212-1szsz.html I know it concerns developers and not the NCCP but it may still be of interest.

Keep in mind the 'research' you have done into the NCCP (mostly via secondary sources without actually reading the Act) doesn't prove your point. The ASIC documents didn't prove your point. The email from Treasury was jsut an email from an individual who may, or may not, know anything. It...

so you don't want to do any research?

I don't know if any lender has done this. Part of your argument is that such a clause would be 'unjust'. So I was assuming you would like to know what is consider unjust by looking at established cases.

Are you saying there has never been any cases on 'unfair contracts' or 'unjust contracts' or that section of the UCCC?

This threat hasn't demonstrated that 1. Not been demonstrated 2. See the ING document above 3. maybe 4. I agree Now, if you want to continue your research you should seach for caselaw of 'unjust contracts' and on that section of the NCCP which covers this - cl 81?? Schedule 1 of the...

Once again you are mis-interpreting things. Look at the bold bit in the quote from Treasury. ie "could infringe". It doesn't say "does", or "will". It may infringe the NCCP. I don't know. But I do know that you are making things up again. Also, what do you consider a contract to contain...

Shadow Did you see the ING terms and conditions above?

I think that is what happened with this one. No one turned up. But there should have been a reserve price to avoid $1 sales - it should have been at least $2 to help cover the costs. If the bank sold it for $1 then they lose out too as does the former owner.