This is the insurance that gets sold to you when you take out a loan, HP, credit card etc.

There has been a spate of complaints recently about being mis sold PPI. This is relevant to my Yes Car Credit claim, so I will detail my claim and how far it's gone here.

Okay, circumstances were I took a car from Yes Car Credit 5 years ago, had to as I was young and had bad credit history.

I had left the Navy 2 months previous and had gotten my first job as a civvilian working as a laptopo rollout guy on a short term contract (This bit is important)

At the time I was advised I had to take out the extra GAP and PPI insurance or else I couldn't get ther car, she said the insurance was beneficial if i lost my job, etc.

So anyway, car was signed, sealed and delivered.

2 years later, half way through the agreement I decided to give the car back and terminate the agreement as was my right. To my surprise, YCC demanded an extra £1900 off me to terminate the agreement.

The reason for this is the sneaky underhand way YCC go to try and tie there customers in. They take out a loan for the insurance at an apr of 26%. You pay this loan off over the four years of the agreement, when you come to cancel half way through, you have to pay the outstanding loan and this forces many customers into keeping a car they don't want.

Anyway, with all these bank charges going on, I decided to see if YCC had maybe charged me any extra fees that I could get back from them, so I did a DPA request.

The first reply I got back was just the contractual agreement and a statement of account. The contractual agreement had none of my personal details on it, just a breakdown of the loan and my signature. I decided at this point that I wanted to dig deeper so replied with this letter:

Thank you for your letter dated 17th of May 2006 in response to my data disclosure request.

 

At present I have a copy of my conditional sale agreement, statement of account and account history. Will you confirm that is a full disclosure?

 

If not, I require a full disclosure as per my original request dated 25th April 2006. I am looking for an original application form and a confirmation that no charges were made for my account being in default, I also require any application and agreement forms for the payment protection insurance and mechanical breakdown insurance.

 

I remind you that you have until the 06th June 2006 to comply with my request.

 

Yours faithfully

The next lot of information I got from them shocked me. I received my original Personal Details sheet which contained the hand written information with my signature I'd provided to them with all my correct details, type of employment, length of contract, etc

They also provided a printout of screenshots from their computer system for what the lady had filled in (If anyone doesn't know how YCC used to work, they took you to a waiting room, got you to fill in the sheet then left you there as they went through to the office to enter your details into the computer)

What was entered was pure fiction. She had me down as being in full time permanent employment for the previous two years.

So,

Here's my request:

Direct Auto Financial Services Ltd

Springfield House

Springfield Road

Horsham, West Sussex

RH12 2RG

 

 

29.06.06

 

 

Request for repayment of Payment Protection Insurance

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

AGREEMENT NUMBER: XXXXXX

 

My request

I am writing to ask you to refund to me the sum of money paid for the Payment Protection Insurance that I believe I was mis-sold by an agent of Yes Car Credit.

I now understand that the PPI was entirely optional whereas your agent implied at the time of purchase that I had to take out this plan to secure the car. I have also discovered that the PPI cover supplied to me was fraudulently applied for and I have included a photocopy of the Original Personal Details Sheet and a screenshot of the Personal Details – First Borrower page. I draw your attention to the Employment details sections on both forms and have highlighted the discrepancies entered by your agent that I was not party to. I have also included a copy of the terms and conditions for the PPI plan which were not provided to me at the time of purchase, but were provided to me at my request on the 25th of April 2006. I quote the definition from these terms and conditions of a Contract Worker:

 

 

“Contract Workers continuously Employed under a fixed term contract(s) for at least the two years immediately prior to the commencement of Unemployment, which has/have been renewed at least once in this period”

 

I was working as a contractor for two months and therefore would not have been eligible for any payments from the PPI if I could not get work or was sick. My situation was known to the person who sold me the loan; however she did not point out that the insurance was virtually useless to me so I believe that I was mis-sold the insurance.

 

I refer you to the recent statement from the FSA in regards to loan payment protection insurance where they quote theCode of the Association of British Insurers (ABI) which requires the seller to ‘ensure as far as possible that the policy proposed is suitable to the needs and resources of the prospective policyholder’.

 

 

 

Your responsibilities

I would draw your attention to the terms of the contract which you agreed to at the time that I opened my account. It is an implied term of that contract that you would conduct yourselves lawfully and in a manner which complies with UK law.

 

I consider that your repeated representations that your PPI plan was required and reasonable was deceptive and that they had deceived me into agreeing to pay them.

 

What I require

I calculate that the Payment Protection Insurance was for a sum £1454.61. Interest for this figure is £797.17. Total claimed £2251.78

 

 

My targets to resolve this matter

I hope that you will enter into a sincere dialogue with me about this matter and I am writing this letter to you on the assumption that you will prefer to do this than merely respond with standard letters and leaflets.

 

I will give you 14 days to reply to me accepting unconditionally my request in principle and letting me know a date by which I will receive payment.

 

If you do not respond or you do not respond positively within this time period, I shall send you a letter before action giving you a further 14 days in which to reflect. I believe that these targets are more than sufficient for a large company such as yours with dedicated staff and departments.

 

After that there will be no further communication from me and I shall issue a claim and lodge a complaint with the FSA at the expiry of the second deadline.

 

 

 

 

Yours faithfully,

 

I'll keep you updated on this as it progresses, but my advice to anyone with Payment Protection Insurance or any dealings with Yes Car Credit to read everything twice and go over the terms and conditions to cath them out.

Anyone with any questions, PM me.

LBA as follows:

LETTER BEFORE ACTION

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

ACCOUNT NUMBER: XXXXXXX

I now understand that the Payment Protection Insurance that was undertaken at the time of this agreement was mis-sold by an agent of Yes Car Credit and as such is unlawful at Common Law, Statute and recent Consumer regulations.

 

I would draw your attention to the terms of the contract which you agreed to at the time that I opened my account. It is an implied term of that contract that you would conduct yourselves lawfully and in a manner which complies with UK law.

 

I consider that your agent’s representations that the Payment Protection Insurance was fair and reasonable and needed to be purchased to conclude the contract were deceptive and that they had deceived me into agreeing to pay them.

 

Your concealment of the true nature of the Payment Protection Insurance has prevented me from asserting my right until now.

I calculate that the Payment Protection Insurance was for a sum £1454.61. Interest for this figure is £797.17. Total claimed £2251.78

I require repayment in full of this money. If you do not comply fully within 14 days then I shall begin a claim against you for the full amount plus interest plus my costs and without further notice.

 

Furthermore, I shall submit a Consumer Credit Act 1974 complaint to the OFT upon the basis that you have failed to conduct yourself in a lawful manner and have misrepresented my legal position to me. I shall also lodge a complaint with the FSA about the fraudulent activities of your agents whilst conducting business in your name. If you do not understand what this means then seek advice from your legal department.

 

 

 

Yours faithfully,

PPI only came under the remit of the FSA in Jan 2005 and any policy sold before this date would have been unregulated. Things have changed dramatically since then. Now have to do a proper "Demands & Needs" document with customers and supply a Pre-Contract document to customers breaking down the sepatate charges for PPI etc before completing the finance docs.

Yeah unfortuantly that's the problem, that's why I don't think the FSA will be able to get me my money back, but they may be interested in the fraudulent activites of a company tht's already being investigated.

I feel I'm going to have to go to court with this one, but i will approach the FSA 1st and see what happens.

You are officially Superhero of the Month...

Same thing happened to us from YCC. We too were sold payment protection without realising it. We got some back from the beginning of our complaint. It really is shocking what some companies will do. They are going or have gone bust now. We still owe on the car - can't pay right now... but have told us that the debt will be passed on to collector company.

Well done u. I'm pleased another human being has smashed through the robots defences!

Yeah, it is quite amazing.

So I guess I'll see what happens and write up my account.

And get my blue tights on.

this is a good read - i have this issue with black horse (see link in signature) they will be getting a similar letter to this - my agrement was made Feb 2005 so shoudl be regulated...i didnt even know i had it untill recently when it mentioned it in the small print - i never asked for it!

i agree with your thoughts on saynotoyes - they are paying someone 40% for something they can do themself!

hi, deemacperth

I am particulary interested in the comments you have made on gap insurance.

At the time I was advised I had to take out the extra GAP and PPI insurance or else I couldn't get ther car, she said the insurance was beneficial if i lost my job, etc.

I also hp'd a car and at time i was also told i had to take out GAP insurance which was £300. My situation is a bit different as the finance was found for me by a car dealer. Your case is slightly simplier as you are claiming off 'YES' as they were finance company and garage rolled into one. Could anyone suggest to me who i could lay blame on for mis selling me gap insurance. The GARAGE or LOMBARD.

PS. Hope I Didnt Interrupt Your Thread

hi, deemacperth

I am particulary interested in the comments you have made on gap insurance.

 

At the time I was advised I had to take out the extra GAP and PPI insurance or else I couldn't get ther car, she said the insurance was beneficial if i lost my job, etc.

 

I also hp'd a car and at time i was also told i had to take out GAP insurance which was £300. My situation is a bit different as the finance was found for me by a car dealer. Your case is slightly simplier as you are claiming off 'YES' as they were finance company and garage rolled into one. Could anyone suggest to me who i could lay blame on for mis selling me gap insurance. The GARAGE or LOMBARD.

PS. Hope I Didnt Interrupt Your Thread

I'm going through this with Black Horse / CarLand...see link in my signature

I think that you should go after the Garage for any mis-sold items as the finance company tho it pains me to say it are only supplying what the garage has requested...i assume the higer the loan is the more the garage get in commision so thats why they are so pushy and lie...lots!

i will keep you posted if i get any further info!

Hello mate.

Go after the garage. They sold you it.

YCC weren't the providers of my insurance, they sold it to me, no doubt they got good commission for selling me it.

Whats the likelyhood of winning for something like this?

ie isnt it your word against theirs?

Not at all mate. Got it in black and white as part of the SAR disclosure.

My details form with my correct details and signature and then their computer printouts with a complete fabrication.

Had a phone call from a Glasgow Solicitors office today.

Informed me they've been instructed by Direct Auto Finance. Informed me their client hasn't given them precise instructions as to how to proceed yet, but was just wondering if I'd settle for less.

Ha ha, I think my laughter ringing in her ear as I hung up told her all she needed to know. I guess I've got them rattled, why would they be prepared to settle if I didn't have a case.

HI

just wanted to know how far you have got after receiving the call from their solicitor. Any more contact with them?

Not yet. will be scouting out possible solicitors to word the claim and then filing it Monday if I haven't heard anything.

Any news yet?

What happened?

Sorry guys and gals, I've been concentrating on my Goldfish claim as I'm at court next month. Chasing Wescot and Equifax and preparing disclosure and looks like they're going to settle now.

Latest with YCC is that I've been doing some digging and almost have enough for a particular of claim.

Give me a week or 2. I'm also chasing 2 Freedom of Information requests against Westminster Council and Greater Manchester Police, DPA complaint about Carphone Warehouse, CCA argument with Wescot and trying to make Orange remove adverse credit history.

Okay, here goes.

Court claim filed today at the county court. Apologies it's taken a while, but I was concentrating on another matter that is now settled.

I've included my particulars of claim below. I wasn't able to get a solictor, the best one I was looking at was charging £400 an hour.

So I've done quite a bit of digging on the net and pulled my old contract law books out and I think it looks quite good myself.

Anyone have any questions on a specific point, ask away.

IN THE ANYWHERE COUNTY COURT

 

BETWEEN

 

deemacperth CLAIMANT

 

And

 

Direct Auto Financial Services Limited trading as Yes Car Credit DEFENDANT

 

 

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

 

 

1. The Claimant had a credit agreement XXXXXX ("the Agreement") with the Defendant which was opened on or around November 2001 and closed on or around December 2003.

 

2. At the time of undertaking the credit agreement, the agent acting on behalf of the Defendant misled the Claimant into procuring Payment Protection Insurance ("the Insurance") as part of the overall credit bargain.

 

3. The Claimant contends that:

 

a) Under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 the Claimant was misled and false information was given during the interview process on the day the agreement was made;

i) The Insurances sold to the Claimant were not defined nor explained and were not "optional" as laid out in the said agreement, they were not accepted. The Defendants agent misrepresented the fact that the insurance was compulsory, due to desperate times of the Claimant; the Claimant felt that there was no choice but to agree to the credit bargain.

ii) The Insurance was mis-sold, as the Claimant was self employed at the time the agreement was allegedly made, the PPI would not have been valid and would not have covered the defendant in the event of unemployment.

 

 

b) The Claimant contends that the agent for the Defendant was fully aware of the Claimants circumstances and fraudulently passed incorrect details to the insurer to obtain these same Insurances from the insurer. The Claimant believes this grossly contravenes ordinary principles of fair dealing.

 

c) If the Court finds that incorrect details were not passed as a result of fraudulent behaviour then the Claimant contends that incorrect details were passed to the insurer through the Defendants’ agents’ mistake as to fact.

 

 

d) The Claimant further contends that if the Insurance was applied correctly, that the Agreement was not executed in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974;

i) As the Insurance was in fact a charge for credit on the Conditional Sale Agreement, it could not also be part of the credit on the additional insurances agreement as under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit even where time is given for their payments

ii) If the Insurance was not a charge for credit in respect of the Conditional Sale Agreement, as it was compulsory, it was a charge for credit on the additional insurances and under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit

iii) For the reasons stated in either (i) or (ii) above, the agreement for additional insurances failed to state the correct amount of credit and did not comply with paragraph 2, schedule 6, which requires that regulated agreements contain as a prescribed term stating the correct amount of credit

iv) The agreement for additional insurances was therefore improperly executed under section 61 (1)(a) of the CCA.

 

 

4. Accordingly the Claimant asks:

 

a) The Court finds that the Defendant acted in a way grossly contravening ordinary principles of fair dealing and reopens the credit bargain to perform restitution to rectify the unjust enrichment performed, to the detriment of the Claimant by the sum of £2245.22, by conferring a benefit under an ineffective transaction.

b) If the Court is unable to perform restitution, then the Claimant seeks damages of £2245.22 by virtue of the Defendants agents’ actions, be they fraudulently or mistakenly, in obtaining the Insurances which offered no benefit to the Claimant.

 

 

c) Alternatively, the Claimant seeks damages of £2245.22 in regards to the Defendants clear breach of the Claimants human rights as proscribed by Article 1 of the first protocol of the Human Rights Act 1998 whereby the Defendants actions did cause the Claimant to suffer personal loss to the sum of £2245.22

 

d) Court costs;

 

e) Interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts Act at such rate and for such periods as the court deems just.

 

I believe that the contents of these particulars of claim are true

 

 

Signed:

Interesting reading if anyone wants to read it:

The Yes Car nightmare | This is Money

Half way to three quarters of the way down. 'Tis Moi!!!