Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • the scrappage scheme is nothing to do with the agreement ...sorry. it's an enticement to purchase a replacement vehicle. just the same as shop signs that say 50% off or whatever.  its a done and dusted deal done before you enter into the agreement for the remaining £sum. 
    • don't get too hung up on the real meaning of 'fake' in terms of the documents a claimant might produce relating to a potential court claim. by fake we typically mean, they are not obviously the 'real McCoy' ,100% associated with whatever credit they are trying to pin on punters. they are often of the right 'version' that an OC would have used for that particular take out date, but with details inserted in a diff font where they should be for say your name address DOB etc. All DCA's typically  have filing cabinets covering each year for most creditor, whip 'em out, scan and copy n paste your details onto them, even easier now with online sign ups. no hard copies ever sent cause 90% of mugs have lost them..... one of our most powerful tools is the fact any docs they produce, unless they state they are 'a reconstruction'  MUST come from the original creditor noty some hidden pile the claimants have. Link are absolute masters at this so dont stick to lowell threads. dx    
    • Driving home last night I contacted wing mirrors with a car coming the opposite way. The wing mirror folded in and the glass popped out. Very minor damage.  I stopped at the next layby (A road) to repair the mirror. A passerby stopped and said they saw the other car stopped behind me in another layby - they went back and passed over details so we could get in touch.  The conversation started cordially, but quickly got heated when I said I was well on my side and they drifted over (which is what happened).  I wasn't going to bother filing a claim as there isn't enough damage to justify it. So I've said to the other party lets just call it quits as there are no witnesses and we both think we are innocent.   they said they are contacting the police and insurance and that they have witnesses. But a quick facebook search found a post by the other person saying they were in a crash, and were 'spun' off the road. Picture of a broken wing mirror and a slight scuff on the front and rear wheel arch. they are asking for witnesses. I have screenshots of the post, and sent them another message saying I can see you dont have witnesses as you are appealing for them. I'd really not drag this out. Lets call it quits and move on. this was followed by a couple of messages that didn't really make much sense. e.g. 'do the right thing'. What should I do now?  Contact police?  Contact my insurance? - Can I tell them about this incident but say I dont want to claim? Will that affect my premium?  
    • This is the crux of the argument. The scrappage contribution should have also been counted as a deposit. It was literally a part exchange in return for a cash deduction so there is no reason it wouldn't be treated the same way.  I did not request a VT, I was struggling to pay after a separation from my partner at the time. However had the figures been reflected correctly, the VT cost would have been 2k not 9k and I may have considered it as an option. Instead, the car was marked stolen and removed from my possession by the police
    • LOL - old one the fiver theory - although with the poops its take a fiver now, promise 10p  sometime in the future while claiming the reverse theory   So when is jenrick, an apparent slam dunk as referenced higher in the thread, being referred to the police? These poops need to know that anything they throw will be returned .. with interest  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Welcome Finance - This company needs to be banned.


tightbum
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4586 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

That's what I'm thinking - but if I default ( I already have 3 months missing payments), where do I stand? I want to keep the car - I got lucky and got a sweet car!

 

I suppose you could always pay back what you agreed to in the first place

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 9.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

post,

can i ask for a little advice please. my loan agreement was for 3986 however my balance starts at 4061. so the acceptance fee has been added.

 

the only t&c regarding the acceptance fee i can states -

"in order to ensure as far as possible that you will be able to meet your obligations under the loan, we will review your income and expenses, including any current indebtedness and other outgoings. The acceptance fee will be charged to you by being included in the total advance to cover this credit counselling. If you wish we will also provide you with a medium and long term financial plan."

 

is this a standard term that lets them of adding the acceptance fee to the the balance and then charge interest. It would also appear that they upped the interest by 8% although I can find any documentation in the SAR stating that they give me the 14 days notice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose you could always pay back what you agreed to in the first place

 

 

Pity you couldn't tell welcome to pay back the fees and insurances that they got people to sign up to instead of stalling on refunds. Well you can only stall so long welcome.:lol:

Edited by EBOY
Link to post
Share on other sites

eboy

they just cant alter the t&c

it would be breach of contract

even if they gave notice

never seen that clause in any agreement

 

what they are talking about ref credit advice etc is rollocks

a charge for credit can not have interest charged on it

period

 

ill have another look at your agreement

post a link

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pity you could tell welcome to pay back the fees and insurances that they got people to sign up to instead of stalling on refunds. Well you can only stall so long welcome.:lol:

 

I've yet to read a post describing how a welcome employee held a gun to a prospective client's head. Maybe all those who want to rip off welcome should just honour the terms of the contract they voluntarily signed when they went to the company cap in hand. All I've seen on this thread over the last few months is people who went to welcome because they'd borrowed from reputable companies and not honoured the terms of their contract for whatever reason, and so the high street would not touch them again. So when they wanted a new car/some more cash/a new credit card (delete as appropriate) they were forced to go to a company like welcome. With the exception of a few genuine cases, the rest knew what they were getting in to when they approached welcome. They knew they would have to pay through the nose, and it ****es me off that some people are now claiming they shouldn't have to meet the terms of their contract, and the loans they were given should in fact be just free money. Many recent posts have focussed on the apparent demise of Cattles, and suggestions that people should just cancel their direct debits and not pay anybody. It all stinks of double standards, you all knew what you were getting into when you went to welcome, as did I. For the record I took out a small unsecured loan with welcome last year, have never missed a payment, and have never had a threatening phone call or letter. The loan is expensive, but I knew it would be and I am prepared to pay it back. I was under no illusions of what I was getting myself into, and neither should anyone else be. You knew what you were borrowing, you knew what you would have to pay back. Stop moaning and trying to get out if it, face up to your responsibilities and manage your money like an adult. I await a slating.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've yet to read a post describing how a welcome employee held a gun to a prospective client's head. Maybe all those who want to rip off welcome should just honour the terms of the contract they voluntarily signed when they went to the company cap in hand. All I've seen on this thread over the last few months is people who went to welcome because they'd borrowed from reputable companies and not honoured the terms of their contract for whatever reason, and so the high street would not touch them again. So when they wanted a new car/some more cash/a new credit card (delete as appropriate) they were forced to go to a company like welcome. With the exception of a few genuine cases, the rest knew what they were getting in to when they approached welcome. They knew they would have to pay through the nose, and it ****es me off that some people are now claiming they shouldn't have to meet the terms of their contract, and the loans they were given should in fact be just free money. Many recent posts have focussed on the apparent demise of Cattles, and suggestions that people should just cancel their direct debits and not pay anybody. It all stinks of double standards, you all knew what you were getting into when you went to welcome, as did I. For the record I took out a small unsecured loan with welcome last year, have never missed a payment, and have never had a threatening phone call or letter. The loan is expensive, but I knew it would be and I am prepared to pay it back. I was under no illusions of what I was getting myself into, and neither should anyone else be. You knew what you were borrowing, you knew what you would have to pay back. Stop moaning and trying to get out if it, face up to your responsibilities and manage your money like an adult. I await a slating.
well, i wont disapoint you and leave you waiting too long for the slating

 

What you say there is classic "youve borrowed it pay it back" nonsense.

 

what about the massive secret commission payments that go on behind the scenes, dont hear you screaming "welcome youve been dishonest you should pay back the secret commissions yove taken from people which inturn inflates the APR for the customer"

 

Quite frankly, these loan companies are NOT whiter than white , they know the Consumer Credit Act requirements, they know that if they fail to comply with the act the agreement automatically becomes unenforceable until the court orders otherwise and they know that in certain cases non compliance leaves them no way to recover their money

 

so i dont see where the consumer can be held at fault here??? or maybe your a welcome share holder whose a wee bit upset at the fact that they have not given a clear and accurate set of accounts??? i dont know but your view really is wide of the mark!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ime Not Getting Into A Slanging Match

Seen To Meny Welcome People On This Forum

Be It Welcome Or A Cattles Share Holder

 

Pt Is Correct

 

People Went To Welcome Because Of Less Than Perfect Credit,

They Did Not Expect To Be Ripped Off On The Agreements, Insurance Which Is Worthless

Clandestine Commission Payments To Staff And Outside Companies

 

Before You Slag Of Caggers, Think About The Directors Who Have Been Sacked For Illegal Actions Or

 

fraud

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jamiethemac

 

OMG what a plonker, you are obviously some kind of proper berk arn't you mate...

 

The reason everyone on here is debating whether to pay what they agreed or not is because 80-90% of them are in the process of court action or very close largely because welcome finance has ignored every persons attempt to deal with this amicably outside court.

 

And it seems likely that 80-90% of people who are in the process of court action are going to get shafted on winding up...

 

...every one will stand in line upon winding up and guess who ranks last in pecking order us the consumer...

 

So why would every one keep to their agreements when it is widely acknowledged on the Cattles discussion board that they are stalling every one...

 

So, if welcome want paying then i suggest that they stick to their agreement as in accordance with the consumer credit act...

 

Jamie the mac...you've got a great future ahead of you...i predict great things...tee heee

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've yet to read a post describing how a welcome employee held a gun to a prospective client's head. Maybe all those who want to rip off welcome should just honour the terms of the contract they voluntarily signed when they went to the company cap in hand. All I've seen on this thread over the last few months is people who went to welcome because they'd borrowed from reputable companies and not honoured the terms of their contract for whatever reason, and so the high street would not touch them again. So when they wanted a new car/some more cash/a new credit card (delete as appropriate) they were forced to go to a company like welcome. With the exception of a few genuine cases, the rest knew what they were getting in to when they approached welcome. They knew they would have to pay through the nose, and it ****es me off that some people are now claiming they shouldn't have to meet the terms of their contract, and the loans they were given should in fact be just free money. Many recent posts have focussed on the apparent demise of Cattles, and suggestions that people should just cancel their direct debits and not pay anybody. It all stinks of double standards, you all knew what you were getting into when you went to welcome, as did I. For the record I took out a small unsecured loan with welcome last year, have never missed a payment, and have never had a threatening phone call or letter. The loan is expensive, but I knew it would be and I am prepared to pay it back. I was under no illusions of what I was getting myself into, and neither should anyone else be. You knew what you were borrowing, you knew what you would have to pay back. Stop moaning and trying to get out if it, face up to your responsibilities and manage your money like an adult. I await a slating.

 

 

Not really mate no...

 

I went to V.T my agreement (never missed a payment) and welcome tell me i owe £1700 for insurances i never knew i had. Here's the best part...

 

The insurances were valued at £1000 apparantly yet after 2 years of paying them off along with my agreement i owe £1700, how can that be fair dummy...

 

I talk to Welcome they dont want to know...

 

So frustrated i come on here, and everyone helps each other out...

 

If Welcome and there little cronies (car dealerships) had thrown straight dice and i could have v.t my agreement which is my legal right then there would be no trouble would they...dummy...

 

Now i'm that angry i will be looking to rescind the contract by virtue of secret commission (illegal) and get all my money back as a result of there under dealings...(legal)

 

Quite a fair proposition wouldn't you say jamie the mac aka THE DUMMY

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its Obviouse Chester Or Notingham Are Having A Nose

Dont Get Drawn Into A Debate

 

We All Know The Way Welcome Operates And Dont Have To Defend Our Actions

 

We Are The Ones Who Have Been Duped

 

Look At It This Way

 

Ive Forgotten The Last Time Welcome Won In Court Against A Cagger

 

They Will Not Release Details So With Draw

 

If Welcome Are Clean, Why The Cloak And Dagger

 

Lets Do Our Talking In Court

 

got A New Suit Yet Mr P

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would appear that some of these comments are akin to telling flies that they entered the spiders web with thier many eyes wide open so it must be the flies fault that it gets poisoned decieved wraped up and left to be eaten at leisure and not the spiders fault for setting the trap in the first place?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jamiethemac,

I read thru every post you have ever made before I replied to your initial post. You must acknowledge that welcome have be up to no good. Why would 6 directors be sacked and postings forced out? Everyone including shareholders, the current board and auditors acknowledge something serious has been happening at welcome over a long time. I can't wait to hear the full story when it comes out. You will have notice that the media as been restrained in their reporting.

 

Your very lucky that welcome has treated you fairly. What I got of welcome I have paid back and much more as well. I have asked welcome a number of questions over the last 18 months and they have failed to give me a proper answer. It is obvious from their letters that they are intent on delaying complaints and they couldn't even comply with my subject access request in the timeframe set down in law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've yet to read a post describing how a welcome employee held a gun to a prospective client's head. Maybe all those who want to rip off welcome should just honour the terms of the contract they voluntarily signed when they went to the company cap in hand. All I've seen on this thread over the last few months is people who went to welcome because they'd borrowed from reputable companies and not honoured the terms of their contract for whatever reason, and so the high street would not touch them again. So when they wanted a new car/some more cash/a new credit card (delete as appropriate) they were forced to go to a company like welcome. With the exception of a few genuine cases, the rest knew what they were getting in to when they approached welcome. They knew they would have to pay through the nose, and it ****es me off that some people are now claiming they shouldn't have to meet the terms of their contract, and the loans they were given should in fact be just free money. Many recent posts have focussed on the apparent demise of Cattles, and suggestions that people should just cancel their direct debits and not pay anybody. It all stinks of double standards, you all knew what you were getting into when you went to welcome, as did I. For the record I took out a small unsecured loan with welcome last year, have never missed a payment, and have never had a threatening phone call or letter. The loan is expensive, but I knew it would be and I am prepared to pay it back. I was under no illusions of what I was getting myself into, and neither should anyone else be. You knew what you were borrowing, you knew what you would have to pay back. Stop moaning and trying to get out if it, face up to your responsibilities and manage your money like an adult. I await a slating.

 

I am too angry, to reply with a slating to the drivvel you have posted!!:mad:

YOU know nothing about me and my families circumstances surrounding our dealings with welscum!! BUT for the record, while you are away from the thread polishing your do gooder welscum halo....NEVER ASSUME! ALWAYS PRESUME!!:mad:

B-O-2

ANYBODY WHO NEEDS INFO ON YOUR LEHMANS MORTGAGE

either SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL; the following are DIRECT tel#s,

of the investigating & prosecuting organisations: DONOT say you are from CAG-only directly affected or a concerned citizen.

 

1. Companies House: Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

2. CH : Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia(MD) for SPML/PML) @ 02920 380 643

3. CH : Mark Youde(accounts compliance) @ 02920 380 955

 

4. Companies Investigation Branch(CIB) : Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108

(part of the Insolvency Service) investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

5. CIB : Jeremy Pilcher('unofficial'-consumer/company lawyer) : @ 0207 637 6231

__________________

File YOUR 'Companies Investigation Branch'- CIB complaint online NOW!!!!

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/complaintformcib.htm

Link to post
Share on other sites

im thinking the night before the battles begins springs to mind...

 

cattles have until tommorrow 14/7/09 to sort out there 500million shortfall i led to believe...

 

remember these were adults running an adult lending company,who in turn made stupid adult mistakes which led to adults like us pointing out there adult mistakes!!!!

 

please dont tell us to grow up and act like adult...we are ...we do nothing underhand unlike some (welcome) adults we know...

 

cattles have ripped off there customers too long and now they are ripping off rich adult investers (bondholders)

 

they also ripped off over 25 banks which include royal bank of scotland which has been bailed out by non welcome customers..public funds..

 

so in short welcome have felt what the karma feels like

 

'what goes around , comes around'

 

bye bye welcome;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tomorrow Is The Second Instalment Of The Loan To Bond Holders

The First Had To Be Paid By The 1/07/09 And Be Declared By The 5/07/09

 

For The Record

 

The Total Loss Cattles Are Facing Has Been Reported Close To 1.5 Billion

Not 500 Mill To 7.5 Mill

 

Thats Why The Share Holders Are Being Kept In The Dark

Link to post
Share on other sites

just a quick laugh for you.....

 

my partner runs an online adult shop selling adult stuff....

 

ive been recieving letters from my local welcome office collections etc

 

my partner has just had an order for adult toys

 

to be delieved to my welcome account manager at welcomes offices

 

lol

 

as i said karma can be a very strange:grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

just a quick laugh for you.....

 

my partner runs an online adult shop selling adult stuff....

 

ive been recieving letters from my local welcome office collections etc

 

my partner has just had an order for adult toys

 

to be delieved to my welcome account manager at welcomes offices

 

lol

 

as i said karma can be a very strange:grin:

 

LMAO:lol::lol::lol:

Are you going to deliver them in person Zaidey...its got to be worth a laugh just to see the look on their faces:lol::lol::lol:

cattles skint.. look on acct managers face...priceless:lol::lol:

ANYBODY WHO NEEDS INFO ON YOUR LEHMANS MORTGAGE

either SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL; the following are DIRECT tel#s,

of the investigating & prosecuting organisations: DONOT say you are from CAG-only directly affected or a concerned citizen.

 

1. Companies House: Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

2. CH : Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia(MD) for SPML/PML) @ 02920 380 643

3. CH : Mark Youde(accounts compliance) @ 02920 380 955

 

4. Companies Investigation Branch(CIB) : Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108

(part of the Insolvency Service) investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

5. CIB : Jeremy Pilcher('unofficial'-consumer/company lawyer) : @ 0207 637 6231

__________________

File YOUR 'Companies Investigation Branch'- CIB complaint online NOW!!!!

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/complaintformcib.htm

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I Said Before

Cattles Are Running Scared As It Dos Not Have In Place Funds To Meet These Claims Ref Ppi Misselling

Rbs Is Well Aware Of This

I Informed Them

And The Seriouse Fraud Squad

Fos

Fsa

National Financial Journalist

 

All I Can Say Is We Are Gagged At The Moment

 

Sub Jud

 

People Will Be Held Accountable

Past And Present

Link to post
Share on other sites

just a quick laugh for you.....

 

my partner runs an online adult shop selling adult stuff....

 

ive been recieving letters from my local welcome office collections etc

 

my partner has just had an order for adult toys

 

to be delieved to my welcome account manager at welcomes offices

 

lol

 

as i said karma can be a very strange:grin:

:eek:...blimey the Welcome "Closing down" Party is gonna be good :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4586 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...