Consumer Loan agreements and Applications...Do not match

[marshallka]

Hi, i started to ask questions on another thread about Consumer Credit agreements and was told to start a new thread so here goes.

I am in a dispute with Firstplus, firstly it was about ppi and then the rule of 78. They told me when i applied for my loan i applied via a broker. The broker being Freedom Finance and then they said that Freedom Finance were actually an umbrella company of Bespoke Finance (based in Gibraltar) and my actual complaint was with them. My loan was taken out in Jan 2000 and settled reluctantly in April, 2003. I then wrote to Freedom who passed my complaint to Bespoke and they responded with a final response and won't look at the complaint as they were not regulated.

I then telephoned the FOS and they said they could not help with the ppi claim if Freedom Finance sold it as they were not regulated.

I later asked for a Subject Access Request from firstplus as i do not remember having dealings with Freedom and the papers and cassette were sent. On the papers they are mostly headed "source Freedom Finance" but the actual loan application does not have anyones name on and the actual agreement has the name of Firstplus.

I then have looked at the two papers and the loan application and the actual agreement are totally different. The loan applications that we filled in is mostly by us and it states we applied for loan of £17,000 over 10 years being 120 months. The repayments are stated as £280 and at the bottom in small print it states that i/we have looked at all the ppi documents i/we authorise you to clear mortgage arrears etc. None of these are crossed as we only wanted the loan. On our photocopy we have lots of tick boxes by us with large ticks in and then on the ppi bit there is a small tick and someone else has filled our mortgage details in.

The actual agreement then typed states a loan of £17,000 ppi of £4163 and is over 160 months not 120 as we applied. The repayments were still around £280 as we wanted but because the ppi was added it took the term up by 40 months. I think this was added by FIrstplus after we applied for it and i know we were told it was part of the condition of the loan.

I have now put this in a complaint with the FOS as i was getting them to check that when we settled that the rule of 78 (extortinate credit) was applied correctly.

I have today telephoned the Fos as i want them to now look into this sale of the ppi as i beleive it was Firstplus who added this to loan and that also the application and the loan agreement do not tally.

Do you think i have a chance with the FOS. This loan was taken out in January 2000 and settled in April 2003

Sorry to go on and thanks for anyone that reads this.

[marshallka]

This is why i do not post my own threads on here as i never get a reply. I have started one before and it just got ignored. I was joining one earlier and got told to start my own and i have and no-one can answer. I was getting some help in the other thread.

[steven4064]

Hi marshallka

Originally Posted by marshallka

I then have looked at the two papers and the loan application and the actual agreement are totally different.

Where did these twp 'papers' come from - as a result of your S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)?

Originally Posted by marshallka

This is why i do not post my own threads on here as i never get a reply. I have started one before and it just got ignored. I was joining one earlier and got told to start my own and i have and no-one can answer. I was getting some help in the other thread.

I'm afraid there aren't many people on in the afternoon and tonight is Man U v Chelsea in Moscow

[nicklea]

Is the actual loan agreement that they have sent you with the ppi and 160 months etc actually signed by you? If not then it's meaningless. If it is signed by you then there's probably not a lot you can do about it as long as it contains all the prescribed terms.

With the ppi issue, that's a different matter. There is a separate forum on here that deals with ppi, it would probably be best to have a read of the threads there to see if you have any claim for mis selling of the ppi

[marshallka]

The actual agreement is signed by us as well as the application but my argument is that Firstplus are saying the Freedom Finance sold the ppi and it looks to me like Firstplus actually sold it after the application was sent in. They said it was a condition of the loan with a cashback thing if i remember right. The FOS cannot do anything if it was Freedom that sold it as they were unregulated and i have sent my complaint in because after reading through my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) there is nothing in proof that Freedom Finance sold anything. I have requested a S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) from Freedom too but not got it yet.

As for the prescribed terms this is mine

Note this NOT signed by FIRSTPLUS but it is their agreement

Amount of loan 17,000
ppi 4,163
Total loan 21,163
Monthly int rate 1.097%
APR 13.9%
Monthly payment (variable) 281.25
First Payment to be made 14th February, 2000

Are these the correct prescribed terms.

The application has no name on.

[angry cat]

I believe that both Firstplus and Freedom Finance were members of the General Insurance Standards Council (GISC) from 2001

Write back to the FOS stating as such, asking the FOS to look at your complaint again.

The link below provides information for you:

About Us - Freedom Finance

AC

AC

[marshallka]

Originally Posted by angry cat

I believe that both Firstplus and Freedom Finance were members of the General Insurance Standards Council (GISC) from 2001

Write back to the FOS stating as such, asking the FOS to look at your complaint again.

The link below provides information for you:

About Us - Freedom Finance

AC

AC

I have only just sent my complaint to the FOS but our loan was actually taken out in january, 2000 and we settled in 2003. At the time i don't think either were members of GISC. I told the FOS all this over the phone and he still sent the complaint form out but at the time he did it was just to check the rule of 78 had been applied correctly and then after receiving my Subject Access Request from Firstplus i have included lots of other discrepancies too. Is it only ppi he can help with. I thought it was all complaints with companies.

[steven4064]

I'm surprised - FOS usually won't have anything to do with PPI

[marshallka]

Originally Posted by steven4064

I'm surprised - FOS usually won't have anything to do with PPI

Is that true? I thought ppi misselling was something they did deal with.

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.u...-insurance.pdf

My complaint is about the whole way the loan was set up and lots of discrepancies as well as the ppi. The rule of 78 being another.

[steven4064]

Sorry, you are right, I was getting confused with something else

[angry cat]

If they were not members of the GISC, then they would have been members of the Association of British Assurers, (ABI) who had a code of conduct re the selling of PPI; General Insurance.

AC