Secret/undisclosed commissions...

[Sparkie1723]

Thanks Sparkie ,.. will give it another read but sounds good to me ,

 

its just another point to pile pressure on my lenders , i have them on the rope's regarding secret commission's to broker ,

 

i have a disclosure hearing in august and looking to request all documents which will be damaging to the lenders ,

 

will the lenders also have a copy of the in's and out's of the policy I had? ,..

 

I have requested details from lenders regarding commissions from insurance providers , but not willing to disclose as no fidcuiary duty ,.. and have this in writing ,..

 

I now know this is not true and definately a duty to me as 3rd party provide the insurance ,..

 

again thanks for your thoughts as many do not seem to be looking at this angle , or unless i am that slow and can not find the threads

 

best wishes & thoughts

 

Hi again Michellej1

 

For your disclosure hearing ...have a good look at CPR31.16 its a tough CPR this one but you may have to use it ....but you have to ge it right.

 

The lender will have all details of the insurance ....so don't let them try to bluff you.

 

sparkie

[michellej1]

I did request documents and info under this act , but they would not play ball ,

 

I will be getting the underwriters sheet regarding agreement as my concerns and points raised are secret commissions to broker ,.. a judge as said it will be ordered at next hearing and more or less the only way it will not be disclosed is if the lender agree's that my concerns are rightly so (hence no underwriters sheet needed) if denied then full disclosure ,..

 

i must say the judge did say be carefull in what you are likely to request,..

 

i have thought about that passage of thought over the last week ,..

 

I have hit them also for raising the interest (over 10 seperate time) not raising the monthly payments and just adding the extra to balance so account is constantly in arrears ,..

 

they would like to address this concern with a £7500 offer,.. as if interest never altered , then set at first interest rate amount owed £7500 less , which we will reduce from balance if you sign a condition form that this will be the end of matter's ,..

 

obviously i did not accept ,.. with disclosure so close and game more or less over ,... my agreement show's that i never paid a commission fee ,.. so who did ? as the broker was independant from GE ,

 

had to be as they do not deal direct with consumers ,.. so who paid the broker ,.. not me , and no mention of we might pay broker or any words to that effect , so pure secret commission

 

and i have paid more then the bare bones of the loan , which includes a single payment ppi policy ,..

 

I will not let the bluff me Sparkie , no way , not when we are so close to a victorty over these sharks ,..

 

but i too will hopefully get data from insurers who i believe have washed they hands of GE Money ,

 

i will request full ppi policy data from lenders at disclosure hearing along with agreement underwriters sheet which will prove commissions paid ,

 

and if they wish to alter the doc's, then some explianing to do as they can not pass it off and say well you paid the commission ,..

 

as agreement say otherwise ,..

[Sparkie1723]

The judge said be careful with what you ask to disclose because under a proper CPR Application ....note not a request...........under a court CPR 31.16 application for an order to be made....what you ask for has to be specifically stated.... ie ....just underwriting sheet is not enough

You have to state " The underwriting sheet appertaining to insurance policy Number so & so taken out for so & so ,,,,with so & so.... on so so agreement on date etc etc.

That's how specific it has to be....that's why he said be careful....because if it is not right he MUST refuse to make the order that CPR tells him so.

 

Can you follow??

 

sparkie

[michellej1]

yes I think I am with you , but the underwriters sheet will be regarding the agreement but request will include to get the info for details on ppi policy ,..

 

so can be looked at as relisted for directions appointment ,..

[just_jue]

Hi, after being sent the info I requested via a SAR regarding some car finance we took out in 2003 I have found out that the broker who we thought was working with the finance company had charge nearly £1500 that was not disclosed to us. We have written to the company involved asking for an explanation but have had nothing back. As the payment was not disclosed where does this leave us?

 

JJ

[Sparkie1723]

Hi, after being sent the info I requested via a SAR regarding some car finance we took out in 2003 I have found out that the broker who we thought was working with the finance company had charge nearly £1500 that was not disclosed to us. We have written to the company involved asking for an explanation but have had nothing back. As the payment was not disclosed where does this leave us?

 

JJ

Hi JJ

Is the agreement still active ...if it isnt when did it end?

 

sparkie

[michellej1]

Hi, after being sent the info I requested via a SAR regarding some car finance we took out in 2003 I have found out that the broker who we thought was working with the finance company had charge nearly £1500 that was not disclosed to us. We have written to the company involved asking for an explanation but have had nothing back. As the payment was not disclosed where does this leave us?

 

JJ

 

I personally would take this up with the finance company as they are an accessory to this breach , as their paid it to your broker ,

 

if you have all the evidence and the company invovled do not address this concern then I would start legal proceedings / small claim for amount of commission , and if a secret commission as you believe , I too would be looking to get the interest charged on the finance removed ,

 

And i believe you can elect to be in the same postion before the contract was made ,..

 

so screen cost of car or return the car and recieve back all monies paid

 

well thats my thoughts sure someone with more knowledge will be a long to advise you the best way forward

 

but do chase it up , best of luck

[michellej1]

The judge said be careful with what you ask to disclose because under a proper CPR Application ....note not a request...........under a court CPR 31.16 application for an order to be made....what you ask for has to be specifically stated.... ie ....just underwriting sheet is not enough

You have to state " The underwriting sheet appertaining to insurance policy Number so & so taken out for so & so ,,,,with so & so.... on so so agreement on date etc etc.

That's how specific it has to be....that's why he said be careful....because if it is not right he MUST refuse to make the order that CPR tells him so.

 

Can you follow??

 

sparkie

 

Hi again Sparkie

 

Just been reading the CPR 31.16 , and realised that this is used before court proceedings have commenced , so am I right in thinking that I would request under CPR 31.6 ? Standard disclosure

 

Disclosure before proceedings start

 

31.16

 

(1) This rule applies where an application is made to the court under any Act for disclosure before proceedings have started1.

 

(2) The application must be supported by evidence.

 

(3) The court may make an order under this rule only where –

(a) the respondent is likely to be a party to subsequent proceedings;

 

(b) the applicant is also likely to be a party to those proceedings;

 

© if proceedings had started, the respondent’s duty by way of standard disclosure, set out in rule 31.6, would extend to the documents or classes of documents of which the applicant seeks disclosure; and

 

(d) disclosure before proceedings have started is desirable in order to –

(i) dispose fairly of the anticipated proceedings;

 

(ii) assist the dispute to be resolved without proceedings; or

 

(iii) save costs.

 

 

 

(4) An order under this rule must –

(a) specify the documents or the classes of documents which the respondent must disclose; and

 

(b) require him, when making disclosure, to specify any of those documents –

(i) which are no longer in his control; or

 

(ii) in respect of which he claims a right or duty to withhold inspection.

 

 

 

(5) Such an order may –

(a) require the respondent to indicate what has happened to any documents which are no longer in his control; and

 

(b) specify the time and place for disclosure and inspection.

 

Standard disclosure – what documents are to be disclosed

 

31.6

 

Standard disclosure requires a party to disclose only –

(a) the documents on which he relies; and

 

(b) the documents which –

(i) adversely affect his own case;

 

(ii) adversely affect another party’s case; or

 

(iii) support another party’s case; and

 

 

© the documents which he

[Sparkie1723]

Hi again Sparkie

 

Just been reading the CPR 31.16 , and realised that this is used before court proceedings have commenced , so am I right in thinking that I would request under CPR 31.6 ? Standard disclosure

 

Disclosure before proceedings start

 

31.16

 

(1) This rule applies where an application is made to the court under any Act for disclosure before proceedings have started1.

 

(2) The application must be supported by evidence.

 

(3) The court may make an order under this rule only where –

(a) the respondent is likely to be a party to subsequent proceedings;

 

(b) the applicant is also likely to be a party to those proceedings;

 

© if proceedings had started, the respondent’s duty by way of standard disclosure, set out in rule 31.6, would extend to the documents or classes of documents of which the applicant seeks disclosure; and

 

(d) disclosure before proceedings have started is desirable in order to –

(i) dispose fairly of the anticipated proceedings;

 

(ii) assist the dispute to be resolved without proceedings; or

 

(iii) save costs.

 

 

 

(4) An order under this rule must –

(a) specify the documents or the classes of documents which the respondent must disclose; and

 

(b) require him, when making disclosure, to specify any of those documents –

(i) which are no longer in his control; or

 

(ii) in respect of which he claims a right or duty to withhold inspection.

 

 

 

(5) Such an order may –

(a) require the respondent to indicate what has happened to any documents which are no longer in his control; and

 

(b) specify the time and place for disclosure and inspection.

 

Standard disclosure – what documents are to be disclosed

 

31.6

 

Standard disclosure requires a party to disclose only –

(a) the documents on which he relies; and

 

(b) the documents which –

(i) adversely affect his own case;

 

(ii) adversely affect another party’s case; or

 

(iii) support another party’s case; and

 

 

© the documents which he

Hi michelle

You have read it right you use this before proceedings start you use CPR 6 if proceedings have started to request further info

 

sparkie

[michellej1]

Thanks for clearing that up Sparkie ,.. it does not really give much info regarding CPR.6 , I have read a good few of your posts and seem to have a good handle on this subject ,

 

well its something i need to learn as it will be used for disclosure in August , can not wait now for disclosure ,

 

and i think lenders will think twice about deleting any info , as no where on my agreement does it say i paid a broker's fee ,.. so removal of the secret commission will leave them wide open for attack and explanation , as these lenders do not deal with consumers direct and can only be approched by an independant broker ,..

 

plus i am looking into secret commissions regarding PPI ,..

[frettful38]

Excellent reading below,

 

Important County Court decision could impact on lenders and brokers - Bridging And Commercial

[lesterlass]

Hi Fretful,

 

Brilliant piece of info,

I am now going for Kensington, have already tried they have no excuses now!!!!

 

Also have you posted this in the PPI section? It will help alot of people.

 

LL:cool:

[frettful38]

No yet lesterlass but will now thanks, and I am glad you found this of some help,

 

good luck x

[michellej1]

Excellent reading below,

 

Important County Court decision could impact on lenders and brokers - Bridging And Commercial

 

Great work Frettful , absolute great read and news , sure you will spread the word , as this covers unregulated agreements aswell , its about time we started hearing stories like this , and give all the hope to continue the fight

 

again well done and thanks , we have the 140 in our defence so will be re-reading this again

[frettful38]

Thanks michellej1 glad it is some help to you and I am sure to many others too;)

[frettful38]

Some useful reading for all

 

http://www.pinsentmasons.com/media/1942522578.pdf

[just_jue]

Hi everyone, I have been reading with interest this thread and have a serious problem: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?254813-Advice-on-letter-regarding-hidden-broker-fees .

I am getting no response from the DCA and would like some more advice on what to do.

 

Thanks

 

JJ

[michellej1]

WANTED ~ G E Money's EMAIL ADDRESS / LITIGATION DEPARTMENT

 

Can legal fee's be debited to my account ? whilst we are in the middle of Court proceedings , regarding the enforceability of the whole agreement ,

 

I was in the belief that legal fee's are covered by the losing party , and as the case is still under the Courts , how can they justify adding Legal fees to my account which will also be subject to interest charges ?

 

And it is GE legal team who continue to request adjournments , making every excuse in the book not to answer concerns in the defence statement ,

 

The agreement will eventually be declared VOID , as constructed on Fraud/Bride , plus many other points /concerns that breach our contract

 

I appreciate and understand , that they can add whatever charges or fees to my account as they wish , which will see the balance owed increase , but I believe that the balance regardless what it states will be corrected once agreement is declared VOID,

 

As sure if Lenders are proven to be in the wrong then no legal fees should be added to my account anyway ,..

 

I am going to email Litigation plus the Solicitors who are acting for GE ,

 

The last time we were at court GE wanted the hearing adjourned on the grounds they have not recieved the defence, I proved in court that the defence was sent to them , plus the previous case adjourned 8 weeks previously , as only recieved defence a few days before our hearing ,

 

so to strike for legal costs for the attendence of they barrister , after they request adjournments on false grounds and can be proven , DOES NOT SOUND RIGHT TO ME , and I will be giving them a piece of my mind

 

As not only should we not be in court as agreement is flawed BIG TIME, they lie to get the case adjourned , which increase the legal costs

 

So lets just keep dragging it on , does not cost us nothing , as we hit the borrower each and everytime we go to court , we do not have to wait till final outcome , as we cover this in our terms in the agreement ,

 

Well they can continue to play games , but they are digging themselves a BIG hole

[cab1ne]

 

 

 

cab

Secret Commissions Act 1910.pdf

[Sparkie1723]

 

 

 

cab

Cab1ne

Very nice piece of information, very nice indeed

 

sparkie

[cab1ne]

you are very welcome sparkie "took me 2hrs to find it" following this thread like a hawk, as i have a very simular situation, and i came across the underwriting sheet by accident. (the fos are useful sometimes)

 

cab

[Sparkie1723]

you are very welcome sparkie "took me 2hrs to find it" following this thread like a hawk, as i have a very simular situation, and i came across the underwriting sheet by accident. (the fos are useful sometimes)

 

cab

 

Yes Cab.....most people only get the underwriting sheet by accident they will not supply it I've made a cpr31.16 request for them to supply it see how that goes:cool:

sparkie

[cab1ne]

All fingers Crossed m8, by the way, its a cracking thread.

 

cab

[Sparkie1723]

 

 

 

cab

 

Just noticed this is New Zealand Law got to got to check how this ties up with our Laws

sparkie

[cab1ne]

"oh sugar" looking at the case law provided earlier, it does seem the same.

 

cab