Hello Bustthematrix I am not sure, but if I was to guess, I would pin it on the repeated childish posts. All the best WFS

What are the problems that you are having Suemax ??

Hello Bustthematrix You didn't by chance post in the Securitisation - Equitable or Legal Assignment thread did you ? Did your number of posts decrease after that thread was deleted ?

One thing you might want to bear in mind with the FOS, is they tend not to deal with issues relating to unenforceable credit agreements. They feel that is a matter to be considered in court. So I would continue to collect evidence as you have already and use that as part of your defence if Welcome try to take you to Court. With the FOS, I think that the evidence that you have shows that Welcome failed to act in a positive or sympathetic manner to help you. If anything the way they have dealt with you has caused you more problems.

Hello You could call the FOS and ask for your complaint to be 'fast tracked'. Tell them that you are experiencing extreme financial difficulty which is being made worse by Welcome and that the resolution of this complaint may help to reduce your financial difficulties Please excuse the typo's..

Have you made a complaint to the FOS/FSCS (depends on the current status if welcome) about this core issue ? Unfair Relationship arguments being something done by the lender springs to mind

Becareful not to read to much into "in credit". This could just mean that the payments made to the account were ahead of the amount required at that time. With mortgages this is often called prepayment. Did you apply for this loan directly with Welcome or did you go via an advisor / broker. I have not had any recent dealings with Welcome.. It has been a while since I had to take Welcome to task. It might be an idea to also start a thread on the Welcome sub forum, there are a lot of knowledgable people in there. Stay strong, Welcome can be beaten

Did you apply for this loan directly with Welcome or did you go through an advisor / broker ? To help reduce the debt I would do a SAR to Welcome, gets copies if all your statements.. Make a complaint asking for a refund of all charges and the interest applied to those charges. Once they refuse, as they will, make a complaint to the FOS.

Did you apply for the loan directly with Welcome or did you go through an advisor / broker

Hello I think you need to build upon your complaint. Have you done a subject access request (SAR), asking for copies of all the 'personal data' held by Welcome about you, including copies of your account notes. Welcome uses a system to record all correspondence including letters and telephone calls. These records also detail contact between internal departments. If there is a note on your file to say they would freeze interest, it would greatly help you with a FOS complaint. I would also advise to be careful about what an account in dispute means and what it doesn't.. If you can make even token payments, I would advise that you make them. This will stand you in a better position with the FOS and when the time comes the Courts. I only say this because I assume that this is a secured loan and that a charge has been registered by Welcome. Having a registered charge changes the playing field slighty from an unsecured credit agreement. Stay strong Welcome can be beaten.

This thread has gone very quiet

Is this what you are looking for ? http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?252514-Welcome-Finance-Secret-Commission-No-liability-For-Interest-Breach-of-Complaint-Handling-Rules&p=2838586&viewfull=1#post2838586

Morning all Yes sorry it is £5,999 + £195 I didn't explain myself very well, apologies. What I am looking for is either a website or a excel spreadsheet that will give me a breakdown of payments and interest applied to my account. Welcome have agreed to refund interest, they are just having problems working out the interest. Anyone have anything that can give a breakdown ?

Thanks Sue Does anyone have a link to a HP agreement calculator, I need to check my account figures Total Amount of Credit £5,995 + acceptance fee £195.00 (interest bearing) Term: 48 Months Interest Rate: 14% Welcome say; £3,468.88 interest Monthly payment £201.31

I will give him the benefit of the doubt as I also emailed it to a few other people. I think one of the other people must have forwarded it onto to him.

10 days are up and shock horror surprise Welcome have yet again not acknowledged or responded to me. Unless they respond by close of business tomorrow, I will file the following claim: IN THE xxxxxx COUNTY COURT CLAIM NO. BETWEEN: xxxxxxxx Claimant And Welcome Financial Services Limited (previously known as Progressive Financial Services Limited), trading as Welcome Finance Defendant PARTICULARS OF CLAIM 1. The Claimant at all material times is a consumer borrower. 2. The Defendant was at all material times a lender engaged in the provision of finance facilities (“the Lender”). 3. By an agreement (“the Agreement”) in writing dated 26 September 2006 the Lender advanced to the Claimant a loan regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (“the Act”) for £5,995.00. 4. The Claimant asserts the Lender did not supply an annual statement as required by the Act until 1 April 2010. 5. The Claimant asserts pursuant to section 77A (1) of the Act the Lender is required to provide an annual statement of account. The Claimant asserts that the failure of the Lender to provide an annual statement is in breach of the Act. 6. The Claimant asserts pursuant to section77A (6b) of the Act, the Claimant shall have no liability to pay any sum of interest to the extent calculated by reference to the period of non-compliance or to any part of it. The Claimant asserts during the period of non-compliance the Lender negligently and unfairly applied interest under the Agreement. 7. By way of email dated 14 March 2010 the Claimant wrote to the Lender. The Claimant outlined his assertions of the Lenders breach of the Act. 8. By way of letter dated 30 March 2010 the Lender responded and confirmed that due to a “system error”, it was in breach of section 77A of the Act. The Lender proposed to apply an adjustment of £219.08 to the Claimant’s account. 9. By way of email dated 13 April 2010 the Claimant wrote to the Lender. The Claimant directed the Lender to refund the interest negligently applied, directly to the Claimant. The Defendant has not subsequently responded to the Claimant within the given ten day deadline. 10. The Claimant asserts pursuant to section 140 of the Act the Lender has abused and has taken unfair advantage of the Debtor – Creditor relationship created by the Agreement. 11. Further the Claimant is entitled to claim, and does claim interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at an annual rate of 8% from 1 October 2009. AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS 1. Repayment of interest applied to account, whilst the Lender was in breach of the Act. 2. Interest as set out in Paragraph 10. 3. Costs. Statement of Truth I believe that the facts set out in these Particulars are true. Signed……. FULL NAME: xxxxxxxx Dated this 25 April 2010 Address for receiving documents:- xxxxxxx

Apologies to everyone due to a few personal events I had to drop the ball on this for a couple of weeks. I would also like to thank everything that emailed me whilst I was away from here. Your support is very much appreciated. I am back now though and it is time to continue. First an update, I last sent this: 13 April 2010 Your Ref: COMP/xxxx Account Number: xxxxx Ms Margaret Young Executive Chairman Cattles Plc Ruddington Fields Business Park Ruddington Nottingham NG11 6NZ Dear Ms Young Further to Welcome Finance’s letter of 30 March 2010, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Mr John Bates (Head of Customer Complaints) and his staff for taking the time to respond to my concerns. Provision of Statements I have noted that Welcome Finance is prepared to concede that I was not liable to pay interest between September 2009 and April 2010 and that it has proposed to make an adjustment of £219.08 to my account. I am left to presume that this adjustment of £219.08 will be a reduction to the capital balance of Hire Purchase agreement. However, Welcome Finance has not explained the implications of the adjustment with regard to the term of my agreement or with regard to my monthly payments. I am not prepared to sign an acceptance form to accept this adjustment in full and final settlement of my complaint. Welcome Finance has confirmed that I was not (as per Consumer Credit Act 1974) liable to pay interest. Therefore, Welcome Finance must refund the interest that it was not entitled to charge. I am afraid that I am unable to agree that an adjustment should be applied to my account. I consider that the interest incorrectly applied to my account, should be refunded to me. Welcome Finance has two options, it can either send me a cheque for £219.08 or it can refund me via the details it holds for my Direct Debit payments. Can you please confirm how and when this payment will be made. If I do not receive this payment within the next 10 days, I will commence proceedings to recover the amount owed to me. I will respond further with regard to secret commission in due course. Kind Regards

Thank you for that Mrsiphone. That extract is not from the Carey case. I have come across it before and it is actually from a Solicitors/Claim Management Company website.

Mercantile Credit v Hamblin [1965] 2 QB 242, 269: "There is no rule of law that in a hire purchase transaction the dealer never is, or always is, acting as agent for the finance company or as agent for the customer… Nevertheless, the dealer is to some extent an intermediary between the customer and the finance company, and he may well have in a particular case some ad hoc agencies to do particular things on behalf of one or the other or, it may be, both of those two parties." I would argue that CarLand was not the agent of Welcome Finance because Carland had no authority to make any decisions that were binding upon Welcome Finance and it certainly had no authority to enter into a contract on behalf of Welcome Finance. (agreement signed/executed by Welcome Finance.) However, CarLand did approach Welcome Finance on my behalf, applied for credit from Welcome Finance on my behalf, it completed all the paperwork on my behalf and it was in possession of all the information from me to enable CarLand to complete said forms.

So some progress has been made. I will give careful consideration to the resolution proposed by Welcome Finance. However, at the same time I will bear in mind that the suggested resolution is only an offer to refund interest that I am not liable for. The requirement to sign the acceptance form is pointless as Welcome Finance confirm that I was not liable to pay interest. If I decline the suggested settlement, they still have to refund the interest

I say: Welcome Finance say: "We further note your new comments relating to the Provision of Statements, and the face that you have not received your annual statement from 13 September 2009. Having investigated the matter, we have established that a system error did occor which did in fact prevent your annual statement from being dispatched. We apologise for this but can confirm that your statement will be despatched within the next few working days. Due to this error in despatching your statement, you are correct in that we are not entitled to enfore the agreement during non-compliance, However, this will be rectified by the sending of your annual statement. You are also correct when you state that 'a debtor is not liable to pay any interest calculated by reference to the period of non-compliance'. Therefore in this respect I propose to make an adjustment of £219.08 to your account representing the interest applied to your Hire Purchase during the period from 13 September 2009 and 13 April 2010 (which allows for circa 10-14 days extra). The amount of £219.08 will therefore reduce the outstanding balance accordingly. Should our resolution meet your approval, Please sign and return the attached acceptance form."

I say: Welcome Finance say: "We have noted your comments regarding the allegedly undisclosed commission payment, whichm you purport, was made during the course of applying for finance. We further note your reliance on Wilson and another v Hurstanger Limited. As explained, we assert that Hurstanger is not intended to be so liberally applied. Only relationships between brokers and lender which are properly characterised as fiduciary agencies are affected by the decision in Hurtstanger. There is no evidence to support your assertion that a fiduciary relationship exisits between you and us (I never asserted that one did). It is wholly denied that such a fiduciary relationship arose. Subsequently, any claim for secret commission must fail."

Good Morning Everyone... Well the postman has been and gone.. I now have the response from Welcome.. I will post further details later... Basically they are not upholding my complaint with regard to secret commission but they are upholding my complaint with regard to the provision of statements and they are prepared to refund interest..

Hello Paul, It is heavy going but the following may be helpful Wilson & Anor v Hurstanger Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 299 (04 April 2007) "additionally the payment or receipt of a secret commission is considered to be a form of bribe and is treated in the authorities as a special category of fraud in which it is unnecessary to prove motive, inducement or loss up to the amount of the bribe." Daraydan Holdings Ltd & Ors v Solland International Ltd & Ors [2004] EWHC 622 (Ch) (26 March 2004) In Daraydan Holdings Ltd v Solland International Ltd, Mr Justice Collins stated that in proceedings against the payer of the bribe there is no need for the principal to prove that the principal suffered any loss or that the transaction was in some way unfair or that the bribe was given specifically in connection with a particular contract, since a bribe may also be given to an agent to influence his mind in favour of the payer generally (eg in connection with the granting of future contracts) Ross River Ltd & Anor v Cambridge City Football Club Ltd [2007] EWHC 2115 (Ch) (19 September 2007) In Ross River Ltd v Cambridge City Football Club Ltd, Mr Justice Briggs stated that where a contract ensues following a secret payment received by a party's agent, the principal is entitled to rescission if he neither knew nor consented to the payment. If he knew of it, but did not give his informed consent, the court may award rescission as a discretionary remedy, if it is just and proportionate to do so. McDonald v Dennys Lascelles Limited [1933] HCA 25; (1933) 48 CLR 457 (15 May 1933) (An Australian case but quotable precedence) Sir Owen Dixon summarised in McDonald v Dennys Lascelles Limited that when a contract is rescinded because of matters which affect its formation, as in the case of fraud, the parties are to be rehabilitated and restored, so far as may be, to the position they occupied before the contract was made. Sir Owen Dixon Panama & South Pacific Telegraph Co v India Rubber, Gutta Percher and Telegraph Co [1875] 9 Ch App 515, 527, 532-3 the transaction is voidable at the election of the principal who can rescind it Mahesan v Malaya’s Housing Society [1979] AC 374, 383 The principal has alternative remedies against both the briber and the agent for the money had and received where he can recover the amount of the bribe or for the damages for fraud where he can recover the amount of any actual loss sustained by entering into the transaction in respect of which the bribe was given Misrepresentation Act 1967 "2 Damages for misrepresentation (1)Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him by another party thereto and as a result thereof he has suffered loss, then, if the person making the misrepresentation would be liable to damages in respect thereof had the misrepresentation been made fraudulently, that person shall be so liable notwithstanding that the misrepresentation was not made fraudulently, unless he proves that he had reasonable ground to believe and did believe up to the time the contract was made the facts represented were true. " Misrepresentation in English law is an area of English contract law, which allows a person to escape a contractual obligation or claim compensation for losses. If one person can show that she entered an agreement because of another person's false assurances, then the other person will be unable to enforce the agreement against her, and may have to pay her damages. A misrepresentation can be an outright lie (fraud), an unintentional but careless falsehood (negligence), or an innocent slip of the tongue. In most cases English law allows escape from the bargain when a misrepresentation was made, because it holds that people should only assume contractual obligations when they have given their true consent. When a misrepresentation has been made and an agreement was (or at any rate appeared to be) concluded, the misrepresentee (the one told the lie, falsehood, etc) does not have to bring a halt to the deal. Misrepresentations generally do not render a contract void, as does the contractual doctrine of common mistake or frustration. It merely means that a contract will be voidable at the option of the misrepresentee. This is because not all contracts entered into on the strength of misrepresentations will always be bad, and it is thought more just to give the wronged party the choice about how to proceed. Remedies are partly regulated by the Misrepresentation Act 1967. English law generally allows a contract to be unwound, so that both parties are put back into the position before the agreement was made.

Good Morning Paul, I have done a little bit of research on this subject too To be honest what you said was very similar to the initial response from Welcome.. They considered it to be their get out of jail for free card.. However, in my own personal opinion Hurstanger does not only apply to breaches of a fiduciary duty. "This is a blatant breach of his fiduciary duty but additionally the payment or receipt of a secret commission is considered to be a form of bribe and is treated by the authorities as a special category of fraud." The keywords for me are 'but additionally'. I would argue that in the context of that paragraph this meant in addition to a breach of a fiduciary duty. Therefore, it is my argument that if a secrect commission has been paid it is paramount to fraud. On the basis that a commission payment was made by Welcome Finance to Carland, I am satisfied was a secret commission and can be classed as a payment of bribe and therefore fraud (my own personal opinion) The above (and other cases) confirms that Welcome Finance by making such a payment is automatically considered to have had a corrupt motive. The above extracts, especially Sir Owen Dixon confirm (in my own view) that in the case of payment of a secret commission (bribe = fraud) there is a case to argue for the rescission of the actual contract. I have given consideration to the possibility that the Court may decide differently to my understanding of the above cases. Therefore, I have a plan B:D I would argue (and this is detailed within my particulars of claim) that the payment of a commission by Welcome Finance, was actually paid by me within the amount I borrowed without my knowledge or consent and that this created an unfair relation ship. As per: It would be down to Welcome Finance as the creditor to prove to the contrary. Plan B has already been tried successfully in Court. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8282264.stm "Judge Smart agreed with the argument of Mrs Thorius's barrister, Paul Brant, that this "secret" commission meant the credit card deal was unfair and therefore in breach of the Consumer Credit Act." If plan A fails, I have plan B to fall back on. I am also currently working on plan C:cool: