This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page . (Learn how and when to remove these messages)
|
In commercial law, a holder in due course (HDC) is someone who takes a negotiable instrument in a value-for-value exchange without reason to doubt that the instrument will be paid. If the instrument is later found not to be payable as written, a holder in due course can enforce payment by the person who originated it and all previous holders, regardless of any competing claims those parties may have against each other. This right shields a holder in due course from the risk of taking instruments without full knowledge of their history.
This section may be too technical for most readers to understand.(December 2022) |
The rights of a holder in due course of a negotiable instrument are qualitatively, as matters of law, superior to those provided by ordinary species of contracts:
The holder in due course rule can sometimes have highly inequitable effects on consumers.
The rule is particularly problematic in the consumer debt context where a business offers to finance a consumer purchase by accepting a promissory note signed by a consumer for part or all of the balance in lieu of tender of the full cash price, then sells the note to a bank (technically, by selling an assignment of its rights in the note) in order to immediately record an profit. The holder on due course rule allows banks to take an "empty head and pure heart" approach to buying loans, and to close their eyes to anything beyond the face of a promissory note when due diligence would reveal obvious irregularities in how that note was originated. The bank can still come after the consumer for the balance of the note even if the consumer did not get what they were promised, while the dishonest proprietor of a fly-by-night business who sells shoddy goods on unfavorable terms to a consumer can take the money and run. If the business has already closed and liquidated, the consumer may be left without recourse unless they can overcome the arduous barrier of piercing the corporate veil to reach the proprietor's personal assets. As long as the proprietor is careful to not cross the line from civil into criminal fraud—that is, the consumer technically did receive something from the transaction, rather than getting nothing at all—the proprietor is unlikely to face criminal prosecution for such misconduct.
In 1971, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) began to study this issue and found "widespread evidence of abuse and injury" to American consumers. [3] On November 14, 1975, the FTC promulgated Rule 433, [3] formally known as the "Trade Regulation Rule Concerning Preservation of Consumers' Claims and Defenses", which "effectively abolished the [holder in due course] doctrine in consumer credit transactions". [4] In 2012, the FTC reaffirmed the regulation. [5] The effect of the so-called "FTC Holder Rule" is to make "the holder of a consumer credit contract, whether it be a loan company, a bank or other concern, responsible for honoring all the obligations of the merchant who originally sold the goods". [3]
One limitation on the holder's liability in the text of the FTC Holder Rule is that "recovery hereunder by the debtor shall not exceed amounts paid by the debtor hereunder". [6] In other words, the holder's liability to the debtor cannot exceed the amount of the debt actually paid by the debtor to the holder after the note was assigned. In 2022, the Supreme Court of California held that in California, this liability cap does not apply to costs and attorney's fees awarded to a prevailing plaintiff consumer under fee-shifting statutes which override the American rule. [7]
In corporate finance, a debenture is a medium- to long-term debt instrument used by large companies to borrow money, at a fixed rate of interest. The legal term "debenture" originally referred to a document that either creates a debt or acknowledges it, but in some countries the term is now used interchangeably with bond, loan stock or note. A debenture is thus like a certificate of loan or a loan bond evidencing the company's liability to pay a specified amount with interest. Although the money raised by the debentures becomes a part of the company's capital structure, it does not become share capital. Senior debentures get paid before subordinate debentures, and there are varying rates of risk and payoff for these categories.
A dishonoured cheque is a cheque that the bank on which it is drawn declines to pay (“honour”). There are a number of reasons why a bank might refuse to honour a cheque, with non-sufficient funds (NSF) being the most common, indicating that there are insufficient cleared funds in the account on which the cheque was drawn. An NSF check may be referred to as a bad check, dishonored check, bounced check, cold check, rubber check, returned item, or hot check. Lost or bounced checks result in late payments and affect the relationship with customers. In England and Wales and Australia, such cheques are typically returned endorsed "Refer to drawer", an instruction to contact the person issuing the cheque for an explanation as to why it was not paid. If there are funds in an account, but insufficient cleared funds, the cheque is normally endorsed “Present again”, by which time the funds should have cleared.
The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), Pub. L. 95-109; 91 Stat. 874, codified as 15 U.S.C. § 1692 –1692p, approved on September 20, 1977, is a consumer protection amendment, establishing legal protection from abusive debt collection practices, to the Consumer Credit Protection Act, as Title VIII of that Act. The statute's stated purposes are: to eliminate abusive practices in the collection of consumer debts, to promote fair debt collection, and to provide consumers with an avenue for disputing and obtaining validation of debt information in order to ensure the information's accuracy. The Act creates guidelines under which debt collectors may conduct business, defines rights of consumers involved with debt collectors, and prescribes penalties and remedies for violations of the Act. It is sometimes used in conjunction with the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
A promissory note, sometimes referred to as a note payable, is a legal instrument, in which one party promises in writing to pay a determinate sum of money to the other, either at a fixed or determinable future time or on demand of the payee, under specific terms and conditions.
A negotiable instrument is a document guaranteeing the payment of a specific amount of money, either on demand, or at a set time, whose payer is usually named on the document. More specifically, it is a document contemplated by or consisting of a contract, which promises the payment of money without condition, which may be paid either on demand or at a future date. The term has different meanings, depending on its use in the application of different laws and depending on countries and contexts. The word "negotiable" refers to transferability, and "instrument" refers to a document giving legal effect by the virtue of the law.
A guarantee is a form of transaction in which one person, to obtain some trust, confidence or credit for another, agrees to be answerable for them. It may also designate a treaty through which claims, rights or possessions are secured. It is to be differentiated from the colloquial "personal guarantee" in that a guarantee is a legal concept which produces an economic effect. A personal guarantee, by contrast, is often used to refer to a promise made by an individual which is supported by, or assured through, the word of the individual. In the same way, a guarantee produces a legal effect wherein one party affirms the promise of another by promising to themselves pay if default occurs.
Assignment is a legal term used in the context of the laws of contract and of property. In both instances, assignment is the process whereby a person, the assignor, transfers rights or benefits to another, the assignee. An assignment may not transfer a duty, burden or detriment without the express agreement of the assignee. The right or benefit being assigned may be a gift or it may be paid for with a contractual consideration such as money.
Debt collection or cash collection is the process of pursuing payments of money or other agreed-upon value owed to a creditor. The debtors may be individuals or businesses. An organization that specializes in debt collection is known as a collection agency or debt collector. Most collection agencies operate as agents of creditors and collect debts for a fee or percentage of the total amount owed. Historically, debtors could face debt slavery, debtor's prison, or coercive collection methods. In the 21st century in many countries, legislation regulates debt collectors, and limits harassment and practices deemed unfair.
Repossession, colloquially repo, is a "self-help" type of action in which the party having right of ownership of a property takes the property in question back from the party having right of possession without invoking court proceedings. The property may then be sold by either the financial institution or third party sellers.
Chose is a term used in common law tradition to refer to rights in property, specifically a combined bundle of rights. A chose is the enforcement right which a party possesses in an object. The use of chose extends from the English use of French within the courts. In English and commonwealth law, all personal things fall into one of two categories, either choses in action or choses in possession. English law uses chose to refer to a bundle of rights, traditionally relating to property which may be utilised in certain circumstances. Thus, a chose in action refers to a bundle of personal rights which can only be enforced or claimed by a chose-holder bringing an action through the court to enforce the action. In English law, this category is enormously wide. This is contrasted with a chose in possession which is a bundle of rights which can be enforced or acquired by taking physical possession of the object. This may be, for example, a legal mortgage. Both choses in possession and choses in action represent separate proprietary interests. What differs between each is the method in which each chose may be enforced. This is dependent on the possessory nature of the reference object.
Secured transactions in the United States are an important part of the law and economy of the country. By enabling lenders to take a security interest in collateral, the law of secured transactions provides lenders with assurance of legal relief in case of default by the borrower. The availability of such remedies encourages lenders to lend capital at lower interest rates, which in turn facilitates the free flow of credit and stimulates economic growth.
The Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations 1980, also known as the Rome Convention, is a measure in private international law or conflict of laws which creates a common choice of law system in contracts within the European Union. The convention determines which law should be used, but does not harmonise the substance. It was signed in Rome, Italy on 19 June 1980 and entered into force in 1991.
A demand draft (DD) is a negotiable instrument similar to a bill of exchange. A bank issues a demand draft to a client (drawer), directing another bank (drawee) or one of its own branches to pay a certain sum to the specified party (payee).
In contract law, extinguishment is the destruction of a right or contract. If the subject of the contract is destroyed, then the contract may be made void. Extinguishment occurs in a variety of contracts, such as land contracts, debts, rents, and right of ways. A right may be extinguished by nullifying that right or, in the case of a debt, discharged by payment in full or through settlement.
An IOU is usually an informal document acknowledging debt. An IOU differs from a promissory note in that an IOU is not a negotiable instrument and does not specify repayment terms such as the time of repayment. IOUs usually specify the debtor, the amount owed, and sometimes the creditor. IOUs may be signed or carry distinguishing marks or designs to ensure authenticity. In some cases, IOUs may be redeemable for a specific product or service rather than a quantity of currency, constituting a form of scrip.
Looney v. District of Columbia, 113 U.S. 258 (1885), was a U.S. Supreme Court case testing whether a government contractor could sue for outstanding payment when those debts had already been sold off to other parties. The court ruled a street contractor could not both sell the debts at a discount as a security and also sue District of Columbia for the difference in what they were owed.
Collier v P & MJ Wright (Holdings) Ltd[2007] EWCA Civ 1329 is an English contract law case, concerning the doctrine of consideration and promissory estoppel in relation to "alteration promises".
Canada Trustco Mortgage Co v Canada, is a significant case of the Supreme Court of Canada on the intersection of the Income Tax Act and the Bills of Exchange Act and the ability to seize funds that have been deposited by a debtor into an account held at a financial institution in Canada.
Hirachand Punamchand v Temple [1911] 2 KB 330 is often cited as one of the exceptions to the accord and satisfaction rule laid out in Foakes v Beer. In that case, it is held that an agreement to accept part payment of a debt cannot validly discharge the entire debt. In Hirachand Punamchand v Temple, part payment of a debt is held to be valid because it is supplied by a third party and not the debtor.
Cayman Islands bankruptcy law is principally codified in five statutes and statutory instruments: