Thread: Mcfad vs Welcome ---- Lost in court i'm afraid

Went to court against welcome today and I’m sorry to say I lost. I could make up plenty of excuses but I think it all comes down to inexperience and a bad judge.

I got to court and signed in then waited to be called. Welcome were represented by chris palmer who is their legal compliance officer. he will be reading this thread (as something he said related to information I’d only included in my threads on CAG and CCS) so I’d just like to say well done mate but please, please spend some money on a decent suit if you’re gonna be in court again soon…..

I’d spent ages completing my court bundle and had a twelve page statement of evidence which was intended to be used as a way of keeping me on track with presenting the case. This was my first mistake, the judge said that I should not simply read my statement or rely on it so I had to improvise straight away which really knocked me off track and I had so many documents that referring to them proved hard as there was so much to remember

There were four issues in my claim so we’ll deal with them in order that the court did.

Firstly, on early settlement, welcome applied a sum to the account listed as penalty interest. This sum was not calculated with regards to any early settlement regulations and therefore I asked for it back. I had examples of how the settlement should have been worked and suggested that I should be refunded the £200. Straight away the judge said that he would not deal with this issue as it was currently the subject of a massive cases by the OFT and wanted to move onto the next point. I then asked that the judge reconsider as this was nothing at all to do with that issue and proceeded to explain why it was different. He was 100% not interested and said no. at this point I should’ve probably moved on but I again went back and explained that the case had nothing at all to do with the OFT case and infact welcome had applied one default charge on my account which I did not include within the claim. He again said he would not make a decision on it and so I should move on.

Second issue was that of retaining a wrongful credit. After my account was settled, I was asked to pay another payment because the DD before settlement had failed. I proved evidence that their statement of account showed two transactions of Transfer In and Transfer Out, the transfer in being my credit and the transfer out being their getting rid of my overpayment. Welcomes counter was that it was an internal accounting term for returning a direct debit so I showed other statements which did not include this term when DD’s failed. Welcome didn’t really have any chance on this but the judge asked what happened for me to go in with an extra payment. I said that I received a call and I was told to go in to pay the money. Judge then said did I go in with the money or did I go into the branch and then call back later that day with the money, to which I replied “I think I went i back later with the money”.

THINK being the key word that destroyed my whole case .

Judge then said that if I can’t be sure if I originally went there with the money or if I left their office went to the bank and went back with it then how could I remember that I actually went in with the money…… this happened five years ago so I said that i was unsure of what exactly was said but I was sure that I handed over £300. Judge summed up by saying that if I was unsure of the events then how was he able to determine them to which my reply was a little dry but basically that either way I had still made a payment to them that is shown on their statement and they have offered only a joke of an explanation as to which extra transactions occurred on the account. So that’s another loss then

Next, The PPI mis-selling and improper administration

The Mis-selling bit first, i’ll do this as dialect as it’s easier

Mcfad: firstly I contend that the insurances were mis-sold as they were made a condition of taking the loan. Given that it is my word against theirs and there is no tape of the conversation I will rely on documents which point to the fact that it was not optional
Judge: But it says optional on the credit agreement
Welcome: Yes it does
Mcfad: I know but I intend to show that it isn’t
Judge: But it says optional on the credit agreement
Mcfad: ok well it’s included within the total charge for credit and here’s a report from OFT that says that if it’s optional then it shouldn’t be included within Total charge for credit
Judge: But it says optional on the credit agreement
Mcfad: Ok but heres another report from DTI which states that all these forms should be filled in by me so you know that I have read and agreed to the PPI stuff but all my forms are clearly shown as already filled in and presented very quickly to me to sign
Judge: But it says optional on the credit agreement
Mcfad: But I’m trying to show that although it is stated as optional, it was compulsary
Judge: I don’t see how you can

So then we I moved onto whether it suited my needs. I already had cover in place and showed this. I showed that I had never been off work ill and that I was in long term employment. I asked that welcome provide any evidence of any assessment to my needs which they couldn’t but they did ask if I provided all this info to welcome and I said that I gave them all the info they asked for. The judge said are you sure that you told them everything to which I said yes but he then said that I was unsure of my facts previously so how can I be sure what I said when setting up the loan. I then said that it was up to welcome to provide evidence that an assessment took place but he said the burden of proof was on me to which I replied that neither me or welcome has included any details of assessment because non took place.

This is when it started to go pear shaped big time…. I then said to the judge, “do you honestly think that anyone who takes out a loan at 80% interest would add 300 to a 1000 loan or 1000 to a 3000 loan if they didn’t have to”. He then looked at the agreement and said that they had not added Medicare, collision cover, family cover and home cover so if they were going to rip me off then why not go the whole way and add these on too. I said I didn’t know but I thought that they’d ripped me off loads as it was and I was aware of other who paid 1000’s out so maybe the advisor thought that I wouldn’t stand for anything more than those amounts. But still the fact is that I didn’t go for healthcare cover or PPI, all I wanted was a loan. To which his reply was that I’d signed it so I agreed to it. End of story

Next the mis-administration of the policies.

I showed proof that the documents sent to me and the court were not real. I first asked welcome to confirm that the policy document was an original copy of exactly the same as the one when I took out the loan. Welcome confirmed this. I then said that welcomes address on the policy was different to that when the loan was taken out, I also said that my address was my current one rather than the one when I took out the loan so these documents have been made to look like originals but the originals don’t exist which voids the policy. I showed letters from direct group saying they held no info on me other than my name…. no policy numbers or anything. Welcome offered no explanation but the judge didn’t find it relevant, I said how can it not be relevant, if I didn’t receive the polices then they were useless as I couldn’t make a claim. The judge said that I should’ve questioned why I hadn’t received anything at the time then said was I sure that I didn’t receive anything as I was unsure of the facts previously in the case.

That was it, game over, there were other exchanges about different things but this is the basic things covered. I made one mistake of not being 100% sure on a very minor issue and it was blown out of all proportion by the judge. All the way through the case the judge kept referring to me being unsure of the facts even though everything else was answered correctly and promptly.

There were things that I had in my bundle but didn’t use as I forgot to mention them but nothing would’ve changed his mind. It went wrong as I totally lost rhythm at the start by not being able to use my statement as a marker for my case. I don’t think welcomes defence was strong and I don’t think mr palmer was a strong representative but neither was I a strong claimant. Think more Frank Spencer vs Mr Bean as opposed to Mcfad vs Welcome and you may have a good picture of the case

All in all three grand down the drain but I learned a thing or two.

I will be in court again and will come back stronger, I will probably pay for representation next time as I know how much it costs and would’ve been worth it in this case. I was warned that proving mis-selling would be hard and it was. The only documents that the court were interested in were the ones which said optional and were signed by me. Nothing else seemed to matter.

Finally, Chris Palmer from Welcome I know you’ll be reading this and so I thought I’d ask you to think about who you work for. You and I both know that PPI is made a condition of getting the loans, your company charge huge amounts to lend money in the first place then also put people further into debt by adding policies on which are not needed or wanted. Try not to get caught up in what you’re being told to say and picking faults in peoples cases and think about the real issues here. All these claimants aren’t lying, your company and others like them did something wrong and they will be made to refund the amounts paid. You know what I do for a living and at least I can rest easy knowing that I help a lot of people…. Can you?



Similar Threads:

• mcfad vs Citifinancial
• HSBC Again I'm afraid
• Hello! Another newbie i'm afraid.
• Henry v NatWest: lost, I'm afraid

Hello McFad,

Just caught up with your bad news, I truely know how you feel regarding the Judge making the case difficult for you to present. I had a similiar ar=sy Judge yesterday who had already made his mind up before we started and would not accept anything I stated, legislation and all. He had the "I am the most important person in the room" attitude and was rather sarcastic at times. My case was different, it was a hearing to have a stay lifted on bank charges, and I was unsuccessful. I to have learned, although I did fight my corner,as I thought prepared, and failed, that maybe I could have approached it from a different angle and was more politely assertive, and maybe not so respectful. Being the first time in court for me, it was a harrowing experience and the hearing was for 30minutes, which is not a long time.

On reflection I could have done a bit more homework and will not rush to issue court proceeding until I have fully educated myself and can cover all bases and then I will hope and prey I get a fair and decent judge.

This is off course is absolutely disgusting, that justice prevails as to what mood the judge is in. Especially if there is a wrong doing. Like you have said, how can they live with themselves.


What really astounds me is that these people are paid with taxpayers money handsomely. I work in the health service and the workers can be disciplined if they are rude, uncaring and fail to have a duty of care.

Who are these Judges answerable to. If you are given/have the right to appeal, it costs money and little of us can afford that, so you just have to put up with it. Ethically wrong

Give yourself a big pat on the back, you tried, and others will learn from this.

I sorry about that - seems a rough dicision - I'm currently in court with Welcome - can I ask what court you filed in? Was in Notts if Mr Palmer turned up?? Also what judge did you get?

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...-new-post.html

have you checked out this thread between Dipply75, Postggj and a little tiny bit from me we're gonna get these scumbags for every Welcome customer out there.

Thanks for the info - and lmao at the Mr Palmer suit thing - met the man so see what you mean