5. Let me therefore come to the nature of the alleged misrepresentation. In short, Mr. Barnes testified to me: he only visited Motor Nation`s premises on June 11, 2006, to test the route and see a car he had previously seen on the company`s website. After doing this, he decided to buy it; the price was nine thousand odd pounds. Someone (he can`t say who) on behalf of Motor Nation, prepared the contract for him (which is on page 70 of the package) and showed him where he signed it. He signed it in three different places. Mr. Barnes signed it from the bottom up in the box in the bottom right corner because he gave his bank instructions on monthly repayments, which should continue over a period of five years (sixty months) with 230. He has signed it twice on this subject; it signed the superior signature to confirm that it was legally binding on a credit contract by the Consumer Credit Act. Underneath this box, there is another box which is: 22. Well, the terms of the agreement were that Mr. Barnes would receive some kind of insurance coverage for the duration of the loan, and the cost was 1,000.
It may have been possible to get it cheaper, but there is no evidence. The creditor`s “exercise or enforcement of one of its rights” is not criticized; Some late decisions were sent, but, for the most part, Mr. Barnes made only the payments due under the agreement. Nothing to criticize the door of Black Horse Limited was done by black Horse Limited or on behalf of Black Horse Limited. If Mr. Barnes had been deceived into an agreement that he did not approve properly because he had been ordered to sign the payment protection insurance, when he did not know that was what he was doing, it would undoubtedly have been a relevant reflection, but I am satisfied that it did not happen, as I have already said. The Commission was payable, I know that.
