Welcome Finance CCA's

[delaney1970]

The figures are wrong for 1 the PPI and the Insurance are charge to the loan amount and should be charge to the total credit charge.Post had a look and was going to do a letter for me but he must be busy now

[delaney1970]

Bump for post any chance of that letter i know your a busy man

 

 

Thanks

[delaney1970]

could somebody please help with this post said i need a letter but dont know whta letter if your out there post could you have a look please wpould be grately appreciated.

 

 

John

[delaney1970]

Hi All

 

Looking for some advice on this,Welcome in formed me when I was taking the loan out with them that i would need to take the PPI and the Insurance before I would be able top btain the loan how do you prove this.

 

 

 

Many Thanks

 

John

[pompeyfaith]

why do you need to prove this when it is they that have to prove that the product was not missold have a look at the stickys at the top of the PPI FORUM you will find lots of useful in there on this subject may be a good idea to get this thread moved to that forum too

[Major Player]

Hi John, the burden of proof is wih Welcome not you, if you were verbally informed that this was the case then you should submit a complaint to that effect, by putting in a written complaint, they will have to prove that they didn't say this to you and they won't be able to do this in all likelyhood as it was an old sales trick that they used a lot.

 

In any event they may send out a questionnaire that is designed to try and prove that you would have been eligble for cover and therefore needed it but there are numerous examples of how to cover that on here as the line of questioning becomes irrelevant when you were not presented with the option in the first place.

 

To summarise, write to the complaints department and tell them you were missold.

[pompeyfaith]

just hit the red triangle to you left post a link in there to this thread and ask siteteam to move to PPI FORUM

[delaney1970]

The PPI and the Insurance have been charge as the total amount of the loan and the audit I have had on the CCA they have said if i can prove that the PPI and the insurance were part of the loan then I can claim that the loan has been missold thats why im asjing the question

 

 

Many thanks

[Sand-Dancer0191]

The loan can't be missold because you applied for it!!!!! BUT the PPI and insurances can be missold. Here are some reasons for misselling...

 

1 You were not in work or self employed at the time of sale

 

2 You were told that you had to take the PPI out at the same time as the loan or not at all

 

3 You were not asked whether you had any other insurance which would cover the loan

 

4 You were not told you could buy PPI elsewhere to cover the loan

 

5 You were sold a policy which had age restrictions which you fell outside of

 

6 You were led to believe that Payment Protection Insurance was compulsory

 

7 You were told that you would stand more chance of getting the loan if you took the Payment Protection Insurance

 

8 It was not explained to you that there were certain exclusions within the policy that could affect you

 

9 You were pressured into buying the PPI

 

10 You paid upfront for the PPI but it was not explained that there were some PPI policies where you could pay monthly

 

11 Your PPI was an upfront premium and you repaid the loan early and received no refund

 

12 You increased your loan and the PPI was increased automatically

 

13 The Terms & Conditions of the small print were not fully explained to you

[Sand-Dancer0191]

This may also interest you...

 

PPI misselling can render CCA loans unenforceable - Very significant for new CCA agreeements

 

 

A recent judgement at South Shields county court may have far reaching effects not only for pre-2007 Consumer Credit Act agreements but also for Consumer Credit Act agreements under the new 2006 legislation.

 

The case which was brought against MBNA in respect of an alleged credit card debt was decided for the claimant predominantly because MBNA were unable to provide a true copy of the original credit card agreement. This is very established law and causes no surprises as this principle has been often tested since 1974. In fact the only real surprise is that MBNA decided to defend the case at all.

 

What is particularly significant about this case is that there had also been mis-selling of Personal Protection Insurance (PPI). The judge referred to this aspect of the case in her judgement and decided there had been an unfair relationship between the claimant and MBNA because of the way she had been sold payment protection insurance.

 

This case is highly significant for claims brought under the old 1974 legislation because it adds another important basis upon which Consumer Credit Act agreements may be rendered unenforceable. This is in addition to the very much more usual ground for an enforceability that the agreement is flawed in some way because it is not properly executed, or that a true copy cannot be produced by the lender.

 

It now seems highly likely that even where an agreement seems to be properly executed, if the agreement has been accompanied by PPI which has been mis-sold, this mis-selling itself is a basis upon which to vitiate the entire loan agreement.

 

This principle that a Missold insurance policy is capable of tainting and invalidating the entire agreement is likely to become a very dominant feature in challenges to Consumer Credit Act agreements which have been concluded under the new 2006 legislation.

 

Whereas the 1974 legislation required very strict adherence to highly detailed requirements in any agreement, as well as requiring a fair and balanced relationship between the contracting parties, the 2006 Act is not so concerned with the form of the agreement and whether all of the I's have been dotted and the T's crossed. The entire focus of the 2006 legislation is upon the relationship between the lender and the borrower and seeks merely to ensure that there is a fair, balanced, transparent and nonabusive relationship between them.

 

The decision at South Shields County Court suggests very strongly that where an apparently fair agreement is accompanied by mis-selling of PPI, then that mis-selling may well be taken as evidence that the lender has exercised an unfair relationship and has therefore tainted the entire loan agreement.

 

This seems to be an entirely satisfactory state of affairs and is probably a very necessary style of reasoning in order to serve as a very strict warning to lenders to do not conduct themselves properly that the consequences for them will be severe.

 

Of course, this was only a County Court Decision. It would need to be decided at High Court or Court of Appeal level to become completely authoratative. Would any finance company dare go to the senior courts and risk a binding decision which would destroy the millions made out of loanagreement tied to [problem] PPI deals? Unlikely, but on the other hand we have seen for years now that the finance industry are incapable of thinking strategically when it comes to litigating against their customers.

 

It is only this kind of far reaching decision that is likely to drum home a properly-learned lesson into the mindset of the finance industry.

 

If you rip off your customers in anyway, then the consequences may well be that you will lose far more than merely a refund of premiums.

[delaney1970]

Hi All

 

Need some help just had a Final Demand form Lewis Debt Recovery

re Welscum Finance have had on going trouble with welsum re PPI

and other problems with the CCA. stuck now don't know what to do

Just called Lewis and they have put it on hold for 14 days seriously considering

going bankrupt this is just getting to me cant seem to get out the hole.

Edited May 28, 2010 by delaney1970

[delaney1970]

Guests go away or join the group

[dx100uk]

why are you using the phone to talk to them?

 

stop doing that...

 

lewis are welcomes in house dca anyway.

 

the a/c is in dispute over PPI ,

 

ignore them.

they are just trying to make you contact them and get more wound up...its working too.

 

sit tight and wait for your PPI caase to be resolved.

 

dx

 

 

hi guests....whats the matter..leeching phone calls not working again.

[delaney1970]

Ah thanks for the dx was not awear that they were connected