Good news.

Swift have been ordered to pay back all charges plus interest in a county court judgment. The judge ruled that their standard terms between 2002 to 2009 were unfair.

Regards

That's brilliant news Paul. Well done!!!

hi do you mind advising which solicitors you used to win the case?

I'm not sure this refers to a case for PW I think someone else.

has anyone got any details regarding this case where swift was made to pay back all charges plus interest, or details of the solicitor firm used against them. would be a great help!!!

Paul hi,

I was interested in your comments regarding Swifts unlawful charges for the period you listed, only I took out a swift loan in 2007 for £7500 for ten years that's due to end in October this year.

I have already paid back £15000 and Swift are demanding an additional £18500 IN October FOR INTEREST AND ACCOUNT CHARGES due to some missed payments during the last 10 years.

This amount seems crazy I wondered if it is even legal I would have to sell my house to raise this sort of money. any advice or info would be appreciated.

Best Regards

J Dallison.

the FSA recently meted out a £630000 fine for excessive arrears charges

FSA investigates Swift Group for arrears handling practices - Money ...

https://www.moneymarketing.co.uk/fsa-investigates-swift-group-for-arrears-handling-

although this was 2010

The Ombudsman took a similar view too.

Ref:

complaint

Mrs M complains that Swift Advances Plc (Swift) has applied excessive fees and charges to her secured loan account.

The amount Mrs M owes Swift has increased over time rather than reducing as she has made repayments.

Mrs M is very concerned that she will end up losing her home.

background

Mrs M took out a secured loan with Swift Advances Plc in September 2005 for around £20,000 over a 10-year term.

The secured loan history shows that some repayments to the loan account have been missed, paid late or made in part since 2006.

The account has had arrears charges, legal fees and additional interest added to it over the years.

As a consequence, the loan balance has not reduced in line with a standard loan profile.

A number of repayment arrangements have been agreed, however, repayments made have not been large enough to cover charges and additional interest on the account, and have not reduced the loan balance.

During discussions with Swift in 2013, Mrs M became aware of the extent to which her loan balance had increased and so she raised her complaint.

adjudicator’s findings

The adjudicator recommended that the complaint be upheld to the extent that he considered there were a number of fees that should be refunded to Mrs M,

but, in general, he found that the loan account balance was reflective of the money Mrs M owed to Swift, and that Swift had demonstrated it had made sufficient effort to agree “affordable” repayment plans with Mrs M.

Mrs M rejected the adjudicator’s findings and so this complaint has now been passed to me for a final decision.

my findings

I have considered all the available evidence and arguments to decide what is fair and reasonable in the circumstances of this complaint.

Having done so,

I have come to the same decision as the adjudicator and for broadly the same reasons.

I note that Swift has now increased its offer to refund charges to Mrs M since the adjudicator’s opinion was issued.

Swift has offered to refund nearly £3,000 of fees and charges to Mrs M’s account.

Swift has also placed Mrs M’s borrowing onto a lower interest rate as part of a 12-month concession agreement, due to be renegotiated later in the year.

arrears fees and charges

The approach of this service is that arrears fees and account management charges, also charged by Swift to loan accounts in arrears, should not be charged in months where the loan repayment has been made, or where a contractual repayment plan was in place and the agreed payment made.

Arrears charges and account management charges should reflect work undertaken by the business in managing those arrears, and multiple fees each month are considered to be unfair.

Swift’s offer to refund charges is in line with this guidance. The arrears charges that haven’t been reversed have been applied in months where repayments were not made. I am satisfied that the offer Swift has made to refund fees seems fair and reasonable in the circumstances of this complaint.

interest rate

I appreciate that Mrs M had wanted Swift to “freeze” interest on her loan account as she considered that interest was escalating to the point where she would never be able to repay her loan.

I find that Swift’s concessionary agreement, reducing the rate of interest charged to around 8%, is reasonable in the circumstances.

I hope that Swift will continue to honour a concessionary interest rate when the current agreement is up for renewal later this year.

conclusion

I understand how concerned Mrs M must have been when she realised that her borrowings with Swift had escalated to such a degree.

Even after the refund of fees offered by Swift, this still leaves Mrs M with a significantly higher balance to repay than the initial sum borrowed in 2005.

Whilst regrettable, this balance has resulted from partial, late, and missed secured loan repayments.

I am satisfied that this balance is a true reflection of Mrs M’s loan account.

I would encourage Mrs M to try to meet her secured loan repayments as per her agreed repayment plan with Swift although I accept that repayment of this debt by monthly instalment will take significantly longer than Mrs M might have hoped.

my final decision

My final decision is that I uphold Mrs M’s complaint, to the extent that Swift Advances Plc should make its existing offer in full and final settlement of this complaint by:

- Refunding of the agreed fees and charges to Mrs M’s account, with an adjustment of interest; and

- Honouring the lower interest rate already made available to Mrs M to the end of the current 12-month concession period.

Emma Peters

ombudsman

The ombudsman's finding are very similar those awarded to myself and would not agree that Swifts charges/fees are by any means excessive or unlawful.