It seems as though Allied Capital came up with (what seemed like) a clever scheme to avoid the National Credit Act. Essentially the idea was that a consumer would pawn their car to Allied Capital who would then lease that same car back to them. As a lease is not a credit agreement (and so it is not governed by the National Credit Act), that part of the agreement should not have been a credit agreement. However a pawn agreement IS governed by the National Credit Act (section 8(4)) so the agreement was a bit of a mix between the two.
Essentially the National Credit Regulator asked the National Consumer Tribunal to declare that the agreement was in fact a credit agreement (which they did). Allied was then ordered to audit all its transactions and refund any excess fees it had charged as well as return any vehicles it had repossessed.
What makes this ruling interesting is that the NCT was looking at the nature of the transaction (is this a credit agreement?) in light of all the facts and came to the conclusion that it was. The point here is that even if one (or even both) the parties think that the agreement is not governed by the National Credit Act, that does not stop the NCA from applying anyway.
Something to think about when you are coming up with clever schemes…
access
AI
business continuity
business impact assessment
cats
change management
clarity
complaints
compliance
compliance management
compliance officer
complianoscopy
contracts
COVID-19
Data breaches
data privacy
data protection
Data protection act
Direct marketing
GDPR
General Data Protection Regulation
humour
Information governance
information regulator
legal design
legal drafting
marketing
marketing consent
personal data
personal information
plain language
plain legal language
policies
POPI
POPIA
Privacy
Privacy Law
Protection of Personal Information Act
risk
risk management
risk mitigation
science
security
Simon Sinek
UX