Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • My autistic son brought a van from a private seller. ( there was 5 other cars on his drive and another van, plus loads of machanic tools in his hallway,  so he probably is a unofficial dealer).  He gave the van a once over, he checked for any warning lights that might be on, there was none. He checked underneath for any rust etc, it all looked fine. The body was rough, but you'd expect that for the age of the van.  He got his brothers machanic to give it a pre mot check, as the van was old so he expected it to have a few problems. The van is a deathtrap, the seller had blacked out all the warning lights that were on the dash,  and I mean all.  He had also painted some kind of black stuff on the underside, to hide all the damage there.   My son drove it for over 2 hours to get it home. The machanic said he's surprised my son is still alive, and an untrained eye would not of seen what the seller had done.  Iv asked the seller for a refund and for him to have the van back, but he is refusing. Is there anything we can do.   
    • First of all it sounds as if your retailer is very decent and very responsible. This itself is unusual in these kinds of circumstances and I think we need to bear this in mind. The guarantee is not particularly relevant and in fact the dealer had a statutory duty to exercise a certain responsibility for your computer – probably for several years as their obligation under the consumer rights act. The dealer may not have known this and it simply acting out of a sense of moral responsibility and that is even more noteworthy. You've already suggested earlier that you didn't really want to cause problems for your retailer. I think that you will need the help of your retailer as well in order to get information and evidence. I suggest that you proceed against DPD – but before you do that – I suggest that you have a discussion with the retailer. Tell them that this is what you are going to be doing and you would like to have a copy of anything they have which relates to the special instructions which apparently your dealer has already informed you about in relation to where item should be left. Secondly, maybe you should tell your dealer about this site and also about this thread. I can imagine like many dealers who are frequently sending items by means of couriers, they have had things go missing. Tell them that we will be very happy to help them recover money for lost or damaged or stolen items – and that is regardless of whether or not they have purchased insurance. Apart from being very pleased to help your dealer recover items which have been lost by irresponsible parcel delivery companies, I think we need to encourage the complicity between you and them so they will be pleased to support you in your claim against DPD. It will be helpful if you can get a copy of the instructions that you have referred to above, and also if you can get some written evidence of your own instruction that your laptop should be left in a safe place. Have you done the reading on this sub- forum? You will need to do lots of reading of many of the similar stories on this sub- forum. They won't necessarily be against DPD but the principles will broadly be the same. Also read the pinned topics at the top of the sub- forum in order to understand many of the principles involved. Getting your money back but be quick – but your chances of success are better than 90% that you can bank on it taking anything up to a year. Have you got anything in writing from DPD either refusing you or telling you that they won't discuss with you?  
    • Thank you for telling us the text of the letter you had from the police. As we don't seem to have come across this before, it would be really useful for us to see the original please. HB
    • Pasco has recalled 104,000 packs of sliced bread after rat remains were found in at least two packs.View the full article
    • UPDATE I went rooting through an old box of paperwork I have and I've found the original Default Notice. It is dated **/**/201*, however.. The copy of the Default Notice that they sent with the LBC has a completely different date on it 😮 Can they issue 2 default notices for the same debt? Where they have changed the date on the copy, they have also changed the amount owed through failed payments and how much is required to be paid by a certain date. In addition, they sent (with the 1st LBC) a copy of the termination of the agreement, which I cannot find the original. However, the termination date is 3 days after the date given on the (doctored) Default Notice, by which monies are to be paid by. So, they gave until the 'x' date to pay the arrears, then terminated the agreement 3 days later. I bet a dollar to a dime they've doctored the termination date also.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Mis-sold mortgage compensation


esg
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4420 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Has anyone noticed all the "mis-sold mortgage compensation claim" companies that have been sprouting up since it was featured on C4 news?? they all tend to have the c4 clip embedded on their home page.

 

It's different from ERC claims and focusses on how the mortgage was sold, i.e. was the broker commission led, so I'm not sure how they'd work out the cost of the compensation if someone is sold a mortgage they'd never be able to maintain then lose their house 2 years down the line as a result of some commission hungry broker!!!

 

So is this gonna be the next big claim after PPI's or can we just expect lengthy test cases with a massive back log off claims pending???

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dug this up from my saved files....

 

How can I tell if I have a mis-sold mortgage?

 

Did one or more of the following happen to you when you were being advised about your mortgage during the sale process?

Was it suggested that you applied to a specific lender for “speed”?

Did the correct process for the mortgage sale take place?

Were you provided with an Initial Disclosure Document by your mortgage adviser?

Were you provided with a copy of the mortgage Fact Find Document by your adviser?

Were you provided with a copy of the Key Facts Illustration by your mortgage adviser?

Was regular overtime, commission or bonus payments stated as being guaranteed?

If you were self employed, did the stated income figure match those notified to HMRC or was it suggested that a different figure be noted?

Were you advised to go down the self-certification route when there was proof of sufficient income to qualify for the mortgage?

If you were remortgaging to consolidate debts, were you advised of the additional costs as a result of this by extending your repayment period?

Were you advised to change the purpose of the remortgage application to fit a lender’s criteria?

Did any minor adverse credit that you might have prevent you going with a ‘High Street’ type lender or were you recommended to a so-called ‘sub-prime’ lender?

If you were advised to take an interest-only mortgage, were you made aware of the need to have a repayment vehicle in place to repay the capital debt at the end of the mortgage term?

Were you contacted to change your mortgage by telephone by a company ‘out of the blue’ or by and adviser you already knew?

If you were contacted, had you given them your permission to call?

This is not an exhaustive list it is merely some examples of possible mis-sold mortgage situations. There are many more.

The monitoring of mis-sold mortgage currently lies with the Financial Services Authority. It has the power to fine, suspend and even ban brokers that do not have tight controls in place, or didn’t treat customers fairly under the very strict rules of legislation called the Mortgage Code of Business (MCOB) and could not ensure the suitability or affordability of a new mortgage to its customers.

What constitutes a mis-sold mortgage?

Mortgage advice given to consumers by advisers must comply with the statutory principles of Treating Customers Fairly (TCF). This aims to help customers fully understand the features, benefits, risks and costs of the financial products they buy. It also aims to minimise the sale of unsuitable products by encouraging best practice before, during and after the sale.

The legislation makes the following very important statement – “A firm must pay due regard to the interests of its customers and ‘treat them fairly’”.

What might constitute a mis-sold mortgage arranged for you?

The following are just examples: -

The broker placed the mortgage with a lender that paid him the best commission (this is called a procuration fee) when a more suitable product was available elsewhere and probably at a cheaper rate

Borrowers who are advised to self-certify their incomes, possibly to ‘fast track’ their mortgage application when they qualify for a (cheaper) full status product

The broker failed to give over an Initial Disclosure Document at the start of the mortgage interview. This details the sort of mortgage advice they can give and whether they can recommend products from all lenders or from just a limited ‘panel’

The broker failed to supply a copy of the Key Facts Illustration that must include the financial details of the recommended mortgage so the borrower can make an ‘informed choice’. This will include the initial and future (anticipated) interest rates, the current and future (anticipated) repayments, fees charged, early repayment penalties (if any) etc

No available records are available of the sale/advice process

The broker has failed to take due care in assessing the borrower’s future ability to pay the mortgage after the initial rate expires. This is referred to as ‘payment shock’

Self-employed applicants who were advised to take a mortgage term beyond retirement with no ‘real’ means to repay

Inclusion of State Benefits currently received that might not be guaranteed in the long-term

Omitting some debts when assessing the borrower’s ability to pay the mortgage. These are usually unsecured debts i.e. loans, credit cards etc

Lack of clear advice on having a repayment plan in place to repay the mortgage at the end of the term. An interest only mortgage will not, by definition, repay the original capital debt, so what is the repayment method?

Coercion into buying a mortgage product that was inappropriate for the borrower’s needs

Inappropriately combining other financial products with mortgages in a way that makes them seem compulsory e.g. buildings & contents insurance, Accident Sickness and Unemployment cover or Mortgage Payment Protection Insurance

Not offering products from other lenders when a borrower’s true credit rating is established. This is called ‘cascading’ and should include product offerings from several lenders and not a more expensive one from the original one

Offering mortgage products where the initial rating period (i.e. fixed, discount etc) does not suit the borrower’s individual circumstances

Failure to offer borrowers a selection of mortgage products and not assisting in the decision process

The broker charging excessive fees. The guidelines suggest that the broker should be remunerated in proportion to the amount of work needed to finally place the mortgage

Failure to fully explain early repayment penalties (if applicable) when borrowers leave their current lender

The broker recommending a full remortgage with a new lender when a further advance from the borrower’s current lender would have been more appropriate (and probably cheaper)

Any suggestion on the part of the broker to omit details that might seem irrelevant but are important to the lender e.g. omitting to disclose other occupants over the age of 17 living in the property which is to be mortgaged

There are many more breaches that constitute a mis-sold mortgage. The fundamental question that you need to ask yourself is “was I treated fairly by my mortgage adviser”?

Remember that TCF does not mean the same as brokers being ‘nice’ to customers or creating satisfied customers, it is a breach where there is failure by ‘a firm (to) pay due regard to the interests of its customers and treat them fairly’.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This may also interest you...

Many specialist lenders used mortgage packagers to originate applications via mortgage intermediaries. These acted as agents of the lender. Your CRA information should not be passed to a third party for use in selecting a mortgage. Mortgage Packagers often used the CRA data to advise the mortgage intermediary on products available from lenders based upon the results of the CRA search. They were arguably giving advice to the mortgage intermediary on the suitability of products without knowing the borrowers full circumstances. This is contrary to the Mortgage Code of Business

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I am currently trying to get as much information on how to sue my mortgage company for mis selling my mortgage.

 

I tick around 60% of the criteria but want to do the suing myself as I don't like the idea of paying a company about 25% of what I may win.

 

I am not a lawyer or solicitor but have managed to stave of repossession last year with the help of CAG and I am hoping some of the members may be able to help me to do this.

 

I would of course put everything on CAG to help anyone else who may wish to follow this line and give as much help as possible.

 

When I have looked for information the web search site(s) seem to point straight to the companies who (in my mind) want to fleece me of up to 25% of what is rightly mine.

 

Any help will be appreciated.

 

jasperpad

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi jasperpad..This worries me a bit..........

.""I tick around 60% of the criteria but want to do the suing myself as I don't like the idea of paying a company about 25% of what I may win.""

 

A bit close to the 50/50 win lose.Bear in mind here that you are taking on a mortgage Co. with a large litigation dept,and large resources to finance litigation.

My initial thought is official complaint via OFT and FSA...One more thing to consider IF you take them to court YOU have to prove it...they just have to defend their actions.

I will post info up for you..their is a shed load to think about ie,hidden commission,Misrepresentation,Coercion, Financial services act MCOB etc.etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi jasperpad..This worries me a bit..........

.""I tick around 60% of the criteria but want to do the suing myself as I don't like the idea of paying a company about 25% of what I may win.""

 

A bit close to the 50/50 win lose.Bear in mind here that you are taking on a mortgage Co. with a large litigation dept,and large resources to finance litigation.

My initial thought is official complaint via OFT and FSA...One more thing to consider IF you take them to court YOU have to prove it...they just have to defend their actions.

I will post info up for you..their is a shed load to think about ie,hidden commission,Misrepresentation,Coercion, Financial services act MCOB etc.etc

 

The thing that worries me about people bandying about 'suing' for mis-sold mortgages is that the end result is likely to be rescission. All that means is the original amount borrowed will have to be repaid (immediately) - this usually means having to sell the property in order to finance it. It's not a 'winning' situation - it's a mitigating one, which generally means the mortgagor loses their home anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So maybe the best thing is to get one of the no win no fee companies to do the work for me, and then post the way they did it?

 

I would still like to have as much info before I do decide which way to go.

 

thanks for the help already and as usual everything is put as easy as possible for us all to follow.

 

 

Hi jasperpad..This worries me a bit..........

.""I tick around 60% of the criteria but want to do the suing myself as I don't like the idea of paying a company about 25% of what I may win.""

 

A bit close to the 50/50 win lose.Bear in mind here that you are taking on a mortgage Co. with a large litigation dept,and large resources to finance litigation.

My initial thought is official complaint via OFT and FSA...One more thing to consider IF you take them to court YOU have to prove it...they just have to defend their actions.

I will post info up for you..their is a shed load to think about ie,hidden commission,Misrepresentation,Coercion, Financial services act MCOB etc.etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point Lea

and to reiterate the win/loose 50/50 the odds are not very good,so I stand by

 

""Bear in mind here that you are taking on a mortgage Co. with a large litigation dept,and large resources to finance litigation.

My initial thought is official complaint via OFT and FSA..

One more thing to consider IF you take them to court YOU have to prove it...they just have to defend their actions.""

 

Saying is one thing PROVING it is the major problem..

Link to post
Share on other sites

One more point in ref to esg......expect lengthy test cases with a massive back log off claims pending???

My opinion is....

Iif this is done for the wrong reasons

ie.just to get compen!!..and the claims companies take over then it could end like the Manchester cases.

 

This should NOT be about getting out of something(a debt)

BUThow to put an injustice right in your favour.. Or as best you can!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
One more point in ref to esg......expect lengthy test cases with a massive back log off claims pending???

My opinion is....

Iif this is done for the wrong reasons

ie.just to get compen!!..and the claims companies take over then it could end like the Manchester cases.

 

What were the Manchester Cases???

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...