Welcome - illegal repo in contravention of section 92 and unfair relationship ** WON **

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

As far as I was aware, officially I didn't pay anything to anybody apart from welcome finance for the amounts they set out to include the cash price for the car and the cost of the insurances. But in effect, after much investigation, it appears I would have inadvertently paid half of the insurance premiums as commission to welcome and they then paid half of that amount to the broker, so in a roundabout kind of way I would have paid money to welcome and a broker to cover the amount of commission dealings that went on without my knowledge. This is one of the reasons I have always felt their behaviour was grossly unfair!

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

Sorry I should correct that last post! I allege that the amounts of commission received by welcome from Norwich Union exceeded half of the actual cost of the policies, welcome allege it was only 45%

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

Hang on, let me correct that one too! welcome NOW allege it was 45%, first they said it was none at all and then they said it was 2%, but hey who's counting??

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

Wait a minute, I'd better correct that one too! First they said they didn't pay any commission to anybody, then they said they only paid 2%, then they said they received 45% and paid 22.5% to the broker. I'll get it right in a minute, well it would be a lot easier to understand if they stuck to the same story from the beginning

[iconoclash]

Ho - how funny - you do need a degree in law and language then to make any sense of the way these deals work:-) This is so similar to my situation and I have to put up with the sarcastic comments from the finance manager about how I simply dont understand the law of agency so i should just go away and multiply stupid ole me - of course you are the one who pays even if it is hidden and sideways - or - are they saying they pay it all cos they are so kind

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

Ho - how funny - you do need a degree in law and language then to make any sense of the way these deals work:-) This is so similar to my situation and I have to put up with the sarcastic comments from the finance manager about how I simply dont understand the law of agency so i should just go away and multiply stupid ole me - of course you are the one who pays even if it is hidden and sideways - or - are they saying they pay it all cos they are so kind

 

Oh I've had that one too! They love to be patronising, it's what makes them feel so good about themselves.

 

Well if welcome sell an NU policy for £1000, for example, but NU give them £600 when they sell it and then they sell it to the customer for £1000, surely it works out that they have paid £400 for a policy and sold it to the customer for a £600 profit?? Who ends up getting stiffed and who ends up quids in??

[napoleon_dynamite]

Crikey, what a mess! I can see why it has been rumbling on for so long now!!!

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

Crikey, what a mess! I can see why it has been rumbling on for so long now!!!

I don't think they even care what they say any more, there have been so many different stories it must be impossible for them to remember what they said last let alone what they said first! Unluckily for them I happen to be the kind of person that remembers every tiny detail of everything anybody ever said to me, (ask my husband lol!), so as soon as a new version appears it triggers the "Contradiction Recognition Alert Procedure!!"

[dadofholly]

On that topic, you should check out Flanagan v Nemo... http://www.shoosmiths.co.uk/news/3769.asp

 

Ah the man who joined the site two days after db.

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

Ah the man who joined the site two days after db.

Oh really? I'm off to DMOR then

[dadofholly]

Of course the obvious question is, did you pay the broker to sort out the finance for you?

 

Not relevant - hurstanger is clear - no motive needs proving. It is either decalred - or not declared. If it is not declared it is secret.

 

The broker simply needs to decalre that they will recieve a payment from the leneder - like mine did when they arranged my mortgage. Not rocket science.

[dadofholly]

Oh really? I'm off to DMOR then

 

Usually logs on a within an hour of each other too.

 

And he even pops up on the very same threads.

Edited March 12, 2012 by dadofholly

[dadofholly]

Not relevant to your post? As I said DYOR or not the choice is yours. But in your post you didn't only refer to WFS.

.

 

Yes i did - infact i only refred to Mr Palmer.

 

And like i said it has nothing to do with the case i refer to - as the case i refer to does not include commission.

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

Not relevant - hurstanger is clear - no motive needs proving. It is either decalred - or not declared. If it is not declared it is secret.

 

The broker simply needs to decalre that they will recieve a payment from the leneder - like mine did when they arranged my mortgage. Not rocket science.

Oh but Mr Palmer said on the stand at trial that 'Undisclosed' and 'Secret' were different things altogether and just because it was undisclosed it doesn't mean it was secret, in fact 'Secret' is a legal term apparently and didn't apply in this case, but then he also said that they only paid 2% commission so it's anybody's guess really!

[dadofholly]

On that topic, you should check out Flanagan v Nemo... http://www.shoosmiths.co.uk/news/3769.asp

 

Relevant paragraph

 

Nemo only came into the transaction at its latter stages. They had no knowledge of the communications between Mr Flanagan and Central, which Mr Flanagan relied on to establish a fiduciary relationship. On that basis, any claim for procuring breach of fiduciary duty as against Nemo was found to fail as the lender could not have been aware of any special relationship between broker and borrower.

 

This is what makes it distinct from Hurstanger - Nemo had no knowledge. But i bet the paper trail in the OP's case shows a different set of circumstances.

[dadofholly]

Nice to see Cag get a mention from Welcomes Solicitor

 

http://www.cleggssolicitors.com/nottingham-solicitors/index.php?view=article&catid=35%3Apersonalinjuryandlitigation&id=154%3Aharrison&tmpl=component&print=1&page=&option=com_content

 

PPI claims at an end

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

I know that tickled me too when I read it

Oh yes I noticed that PPI claims had come to an end too following that decision

 

ICOB only covers insurance, shame about the rest of it then eh?

[dadofholly]

Oh but Mr Palmer said on the stand at trial that 'Undisclosed' and 'Secret' were different things altogether and just because it was undisclosed it doesn't mean it was secret, in fact 'Secret' is a legal term apparently and didn't apply in this case, but then he also said that they only paid 2% commission so it's anybody's guess really!

 

 

oooh - he didnt say that on oath did he by any chance?

 

deliberatley misrepresenting the facts? Or just plain wrong - not a very reliable witness.

[iconoclash]

[Well if welcome sell an NU policy for £1000, for example, but NU give them £600 when they sell it and then they sell it to the customer for £1000, surely it works out that they have paid £400 for a policy and sold it to the customer for a £600 profit?? Who ends up getting stiffed and who ends up quids in??

 

 

The sweet shop deal

Jenny has no money for sweets

Timmy has none either but knows a way to get sweets for Jenny

Jack has lots of money for sweets

Timmy tells Jack that if he gives money to Jenny for sweets he will get a kiss

Jack gives Jenny money for sweets but Timmy wants a kiss too, so Jack tells Jenny that the price of sweets has gone up and that she must give him two kisses

Jenny gives Jack two kisses

Jack tells Timmy that he has had two kisses and one of them is for him.....

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

oooh - he didnt say that on oath did he by any chance?

 

deliberatley misrepresenting the facts? Or just plain wrong - not a very reliable witness.

Yes he did, he said he had an honest belief in its truth and then squirmed the whole way through it with many desperate looks to his pals for support

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

A sweet deal indeed

[dadofholly]

Yes he did, he said he had an honest belief in its truth and then squirmed the whole way through it with many desperate looks to his pals for support

 

Report him for perjury - he must have known he was lying, he is head of the legal dept and would collate the evidence.

 

Deliberate misrepresentation - be interesting to know if the Sols knew this - would be one for the SRA.

 

At least report this whole case to the OFT.

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

Report him for perjury - he must have known he was lying, he is head of the legal dept and would collate the evidence.

 

Deliberate misrepresentation - be interesting to know if the Sols knew this - would be one for the SRA.

 

At least report this whole case to the OFT.

 

Well that was one of the reasons I went to appeal, the whole trial was farcical! The underwriting sheet showed the amount of commission on PPI paid to be £398 but Mr Palmer said under oath that it was only £26, the judge looked at the sheet, ignored it and went with what Palmer said

There was no getting away with at appeal though, the Lord Justice saw straight through their lies Don't worry, I've done as much as humanly possible to highlight every single one of their lies in preparation for the final hearing. It is my sole mission in life to show them up for exactly what they are and I'm not done yet.

 

I suppose there's always some element of deceit in every case, a criminal will always protest his innocence in the hope of getting away with it I presume.

[iconoclash]

Hi DofH, does that also apply to the witness statements submitted by legal managers of car finance companies?

[dadofholly]

Well that was one of the reasons I went to appeal, the whole trial was farcical! The underwriting sheet showed the amount of commission on PPI paid to be £398 but Mr Palmer said under oath that it was only £26, the judge looked at the sheet, ignored it and went with what Palmer said

There was no getting away with at appeal though, the Lord Justice saw straight through their lies Don't worry, I've done as much as humanly possible to highlight every single one of their lies in preparation for the final hearing. It is my sole mission in life to show them up for exactly what they are and I'm not done yet.

 

Good