Proceeding contribution from Austin Mitchell (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 9 June 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Consumer Credit Bill.

Consumer Credit Bill

The hon. Gentleman will be well aware that most of the argument on whether terms were unfair concentrated not on terms of enforcement on the poor, but on things such as late payment fees for credit cards and the mis-selling of payment protection insurance and gap insurance. Those are major sources of revenue for big firms—credit card firms in particular—and cause enormous annoyance to consumers. Why should the courts not be able to interpret what is unfair or fair in such circumstances? Has he no faith in the competence of the courts?

Secondary information

Type: Proceeding contribution
Reference: 434 c1420
Session: 2005-06
Chamber / Committee: House of Commons chamber
Subjects: Disclosure of information Consumers Appeals Debts Cheques Credit agreements Credit Credit cards Licensing Instalment credit Interest rates Low incomes Powers of entry Protection Loans Office of Fair Trading Money lenders Regulation Unfair practices Personal loans Financial Ombudsman Service Mediation
Legislation: Consumer Credit Bill 2005-06
Link: View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk

Consumer Credit Bill

Secondary information

Librarians' tools