Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
  • 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

Wrong settlement quote given on PCP.


axil23

Recommended Posts

I bought a car on PCP in May last year but had to sell it September 23.

I went through a finance broker who had told me that when I came to sell my car I would pay the interest on the time kept  + a little extra.

However Santander told me to pay 50% of the finance amount over the term of the loan.

Over 4 years my Interest amount was 16k and their settlement figure is the balance owing on loan plus 8k finance charges for the 2 years. 

Cut a long story short

I had applied under my personal name and the finance was rejected.

Then I reapplied under my business and it was accepted.

I was never advised by my broker that this would be a business loan which doesn't come under any consumer laws and they can charge me what they want. 

I had emails off me asking the broker if I sell the car will I only pay interest to the point of sale + is it 30 days extra that they can charge?

He confirmed it via email that was correct. 

I set up a customer complaint with Santander which was investigated and although it wasn't found in my favour the broker admitted it and it was noted on my file with the following remarks. "The supplying dealership have accepted that you were not made aware of this when you applied as a limited company so they have authorised a lower settlement figure based on a private individual."

I did not end up selling that time as I lost the customer due to the time this took (almost 2-3 months) but I did email Santander CS team and got a reply to say that going forward my settlement figure would be the lower one.  

Called up on the 15th of March for a settlement figure and was quoted the higher amount. The CS rep said that was the discounted figure. Later that day I did my calculations and saw they were charging me 5-6k extra. I then called up the next day and asked for another accurate quote only to be given the same one. 

Called up on the 18th and asked them to look into this as I believed the figure was wrong. Was told that the person in charge was off sick and I can sell the car and pay off the full amount. Any excess would be refunded. Sold my car to a dealer who paid off the finance in full and a week later Santander are still saying the person in charge of my complaint is off sick. 

I need the extra funds.

Is there anything I can do to hurry them along.

Was reading online and it suggested they have 12 days to provide me with a settlement figure.

I know they have done this but it's not accurate and I have made them aware of that. 

Would appreciate your help on this matter CAG team.

I don't want to take any further steps without your guidance. 

Sent an email to Customer services for an update yesterday and had a reply back from them to say that the case is now closed and if I am not happy I should take it up with the FCA. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

if satans bank deemed it a private sale the CCA applies

thus you could have VT'd for free and handed the car back owing nothing more.

5 hours ago, axil23 said:

Sold my car to a dealer who paid off the finance

that was a seriously silly thing to do without asking here FIRST.

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear.

Never even thought of that.

Although in their final response letter they did say they were unable to uphold my complaint and it was the supplying dealership who have agreed to authorise a lower settlement.

So aren’t they wishing their hands off it and simply declining my complaint. 

Anyway to get them to get my excess money back from them now? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

complaint to the FOS?

when did all this happen?

your dates are confusing

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

May 23 - Bought car

Aug 23 - Decided to sell car but due to Interest applied as a business had to get Santander to investigate via their customer complaints

Sep 23 - Got email confirmation from broker that they would talk to Santander and get lower interest charges applied.

Sep 23 - Got final response letter from Santander to say they were unable to uphold complaint but supplying dealer has authorised lower Interest charges. In the meanwhile the guy interested in my car bought another car. 

Sep 23 - Got email confirmation from Santander that in the future the lower interest costs will be applied if I sell the car. 

March 24 - Sold car and have had to pay the higher Interest charges. 

Santander CS has been nothing but rude and abrupt. All they keep saying is that their computer is never wrong. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

good within 6mts 

off to the FOS .

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

How accurate does the 6 months need to be? 

11th Sep 23 - Got final response letter and replied with question if the lower rate was applicable if I decide to sell car later

21st Sep 23 - Got reply that it would be applicable if I sold my car in the future

15th of March 24 - contacted Santander for settlement figure which was provided but inaccurate. 

So if we take 6 months from 11th Sep that is 11th of March 24. 

But if we take 6 months from 21st Sep 23 which is when they provided me clarification then that is 21st of March 24. So within 6 months. 

So how exactly do they decide on the 6 months. Also should I issue Santander with a LBA

But my main question is - Am I in the right? Can they just simply refuse to refund me the 6k extra. 

Edited by axil23
Link to post
Share on other sites

why not simply start a investigation with the FOS.

they'll soon tell you if its out of time.

though i warn you, unless you are lucky, they are not quick.

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have 6k of mine.

Can I not do any sort of legal case?

I can’t afford for this to take 6-9 months with the FOS.

Is this not something I can take them to MCOL with? 

Spoke with Santander this morning

their stance now is that the adjusted figure given to me last September is correct and even though it’s gone up this time by 3k more it’s still right.

I told her in the meanwhile I have paid £10k in instalment's how can the figure be higher than it was in September but her answer was it just is. 

They just don’t want to listen and investigate this. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ofcourse not

they did you out of VT and got £+£6k they should not have 

contact the FOS.

any court claim against a bank about this is a bit dodgy IMHO.

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Spoke with a very nice lady at FOS

She understood the situation and said the previous case is resolved as they provided a resolution to my last complaint. At that time they agreed via writing to treat my case as a consumer finance and not business. 

Now the FOS are saying that I need to set up a new case that I don't agree with the settlement figure advised. 

I can see the FOS's logic that it should be a new complaint as the previous complaints resolution I agree with.

My complaint now is that I don't agree with the settlement figure provided. 

Just spent 1hr10 mins on the phone with Customer services at Santander and they are flat out refusing to set up a new case. Spoke to 3 people and they all claim it's the same case and they won't set up a new one. 

One of their complaints team even read the redemption figure I was quoted on their system by THEM and said it was "mumbo jumbo" and they have no idea how someone came up with that figure. 

Honestly it seems that the people working there haven't even done year 10 Maths never mind GCSE's. 

Any suggestions on how I can force them to open a new complaint?

Or what my next step should be? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

start an FOS case then.

  • Like 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was reading on FOS website that you need to make a complaint first and allow time for a final response letter or 8 weeks. The 6 months on my initial complaint expired on the 11th of March. So technically Santander can just tell the FOS that they won't entertain them as its been over 6 months. 

Secondly it's not the same complaint as I was happy with the offer that they made to me which I have in writing. (is this a legal contract?) That offer was that I would be treated as a Private consumer when I came to sell my car and not a business. 

So now they are refusing to treat me as a private customer so they have broken that contract which I agreed with them at the conclusion of the last complaint. 

As far as I am concerned this is a new customer complaint. 

I want to make sure I get all the boxes ticked so they can't turn me away due to a technicality. 

Since they won't accept my new complaint over the phone I can email and send them a recorded delivery letter to start a new one. Give them 8 weeks to get back to me with a final response. Should I point out that the FOS has asked me to do this? 

What are your thoughts on this dx100uk and others? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes.

no need for recorded ever. use a 1st class stamp get free proof of posting at any PO counter.

this is the problem with you keep ringing them.

writing ONLY.

as soon as they reject you...off to the FOS.

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Understood! Thank you for your assistance once again. Drafting them a new complaint today.

Just out of interest if they make an offer to me via email and on their letter head can they back track on it? Or is it legally binding? 

As they have clearly stated that I will be treated as a consumer and not business for interest rate calculations. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone advise on the above? Google seems to suggest an email is contractual. So technically they have agreed on email and via letter. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

not your problem.

let the FOS sort that out later.

  • Like 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Sent off a written complaint today to Santander customer services. Will keep you posted. 

BTW - I have asked them twice now over 14 days to supply me with a breakdown of what interest they have charged me which they haven't provided. This was over the phone. If I send them a letter is there any legal requirement for them to provide me this? Google suggests they need to provide this within 12 days? 

Obviously they will argue that it's unregulated but I would like this in writing that they are going against their commitment in the final response letter. 

97 Duty to give information.

(1)The creditor under a regulated consumer credit agreement, within the prescribed period after he has received a request to that effect from the debtor, shall give the debtor a statement in the prescribed form indicating, according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer, the amount of the payment required to discharge the debtor’s indebtedness under the agreement, together with the prescribed particulars showing how the amount is arrived at.

(2)Subsection (1) does not apply to a request made less than one month after a previous request under that subsection relating to the same agreement was complied with.

A request under subsection (1) need not be in writing unless the agreement is secured on land.


Consumer Credit Act 1974
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/97

Edited by axil23
Link to post
Share on other sites

well sent them an SAR a CCA request is no use.

dx

 

  • Thanks 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would a SAR show up the interest they have charged me?

Or should I specifically ask for that under a SAR request.

Also noticed there is a more specific DSAR which I can request. Is that better? 

Also CAG team. What are your thoughts on this? 

In the final response letter from Santander it says - 

Quote

"The supplying dealership have accepted that you were not made aware of this when you applied as a limited company so they have authorised a lower settlement figure based on a private individual"

After a full review and investigation into the points you have raised, I am unable to uphold your complaint on this occasion.

"The reason for this is the dealership have confirmed you were provided the correct information at the time as you had applied as a private individual however they have agreed to authorise a lower settlement figure due to the confusion caused"

Shall I serve a SAR request onto the Forza finance too? See what the communication between them and Santander was from my original complaint? 

Will they have to supply me all emails on this matter between them? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just send our std sar

No good to the other lot either as you won't get them. Not your data

Dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  1. You mean what Santander and Forza discuss between them about me is not available via a SAR
  2. Since it's Forza who misadvised me is it worth setting up a customer complaint with them as they might get in touch with Santander and push them along to do the right thing. ?

BTW...thank you so much for your help on this so far.

You were very helpful in my last thread too and I showed my appreciation then and will do on this too.

I really feel you guys are doing a fantastic job helping out consumers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1... its not 'your' data - its B2B data and might well be covered by confidentiality clauses of either business sadly.

2. cant hurt any.

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Arghhh.

Just ran across a hurdle.

I bought the car under my company, is it able to make a SAR request? 

They could hold the information under the company name?

The letters came addressed to me c/o of the company

 

Quote

*Please note that a limited company or a representative of a limited company acting on behalf of the company, or other such entity (or its representative acting on its behalf) required to register with Companies House or similar register cannot make a Subject Access Request.

Any information requested for a company would normally constitute a D&B Business Information Report or other similar report, to which normal fees and terms and conditions apply.

If a director, officer or other company representative requests data about him or herself specifically, it may be treated as a SAR.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

did you sign a personal guarantee associated with the car loan?

i bet you did!!

 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...