Welcome Finance PPI and Mr Z ** SUCCESSFUL OUTCOME **

[pokerking1]

Hi MrZ sorry to hijack your thread but i have read the last 4 pages and would like your opinion on this

 

Hi everyone after much frustration and delay my claim with Welcome finance through the FSCS looksa to be nearly sorted.

 

I have been refunded around £5k but as Welcome have gone into default the £5k will be paid off from my current loan as per the FSCS rules.

 

My query is, is it legall for welcome to reduce the balance down and not discuss or even inform me of changes to my loan terms.

 

Welcome have stated they expect me to continue to make my full pre claim monthly payment and that the account will be paid off sooner than orignially stated on the credit agreement. I have not been informed of any new terms and have so far been unable to get an answer from welcome re - the new closing date.

 

Does anyone know if changes to the credit agreement as above are legal? should welcome not first come to me and ask if i would like to reduce the term OR the monthly payment? as would be done if making additional mortgage payments.

 

And finally if im still upset with the outcome can i escalate it further?

 

 

It appears you sign over your legal rights to fscs to act on your behalf and they can do as they see fit. (like doing deals with cattles and playing with virtual money)

[citizenB]

I asked earlier in the thread if and when I could ask questions of Welcome. Questions such as:

 

"When did HFS first contact Welcome Finance with my details in respect to the alleged brokering?"

"Who prepared and dispatched the loan forms for signature?"

etc etc etc

 

Can anyone tell me how these types of questions should be included as part of the AQ form that I submit? Are they part of the draft directions or are they listed separately? Are they obligated to answer them at this stage?

 

Would these questions not be better asked by way of CPR Part 18 ? This would oblige them to answer and sign the statement of truth

[MrZ]

I've decided to go ahead and file the AQ tomorrow. Can anyone offer some advice on how I should included my questions I want Welcome to answer as part of my AQ submission. I am really lost as to what I should be submitting as my Draft Directions.

[MrZ]

Would these questions not be better asked by way of CPR Part 18 ? This would oblige them to answer and sign the statement of truth

 

Just saw this post. To be honest, I have no idea. This is where I am lost. The process and rules are foreign to me and I am trying to figure it all out. I know that certain requests (such as my original 31.16 request) will just be ignored if there is no court order to go with it. I have no idea when, how, what to use at this stage.

[citizenB]

I will try and rustle up some help for you.. although TBH, I just dont know who to approach..

 

BRB

[MrZ]

I will try and rustle up some help for you.. although TBH, I just dont know who to approach..

 

BRB

 

Thanks, I appreciate your help.

[steven4064]

What you do is you put in a draft order for directions that include the questions you want answering - there are a few example draft orders around on the site.

 

In your case, you have a pending application under CPR 31.16. In 'other information' on the AQ point out to the court that this application is pending and request that this case should not be listed until that application is heard.

[MrZ]

What you do is you put in a draft order for directions that include the questions you want answering - there are a few example draft orders around on the site.

 

In your case, you have a pending application under CPR 31.16. In 'other information' on the AQ point out to the court that this application is pending and request that this case should not be listed until that application is heard.

 

Thanks for that. I have seen many examples but the ones I have found are dealing with bank charges or they are part of a defence where no credit agreement or default notice was sent, etc. I couldnt find any examples anywhere dealing with PPI.

 

I think I am just going to have to leave it out and send the AQ without it, as it needs to be in the post today.

[MrZ]

I've recieved a letter from Capital One (formely HFS Loans). Basically they are saying they need to speak to Welcome about the matter and that Welcome wont speak to them without my signed authorisation. I intend to respond by saying I am not asking for information from Welcome but from them, and remind them of the exact information I am requesting.

[MrZ]

Here is what I am putting in my draft directions.

 

The Defendant shall within 14 days of service of this order send to the Claimant and to the Court:

a) Copies of any statement or other document relied upon as showing that the Claimant dealt with a broker and that the Defendant had no direct dealing with the Claimant;

b) Copies of any statement or other document relied upon as showing that the Defendant did not make misrepresentations to the Claimant and that the Defendant is not liable for those misrepresentations;

c) Copies of any statement or other document relied upon as showing that an insurance policy was purchased as represented by the Defendant at the time the loan was arranged;

d) Copies of any statement or other document relied upon as showing that no commissions were paid or received by the Defendant in respect to the alleged brokering and sale of the loan and/or additional insurance;

I have no idea if this is right or wrong, or if the court will allow it, but I have to send something.

Edited August 10, 2011 by MrZ

[MrZ]

I have just had a very long and friendly conversation with Capital One's legal department. They have said that they are very happy to provide a witness statement that states they acted as an introducer/broker, that Welcome was the principal, and they were the agent, and that a commission was paid to them for this service. They will also state they hold no records or indication that they would have had any negotiations with me after the introduction, and that in the normal course of events, once an introduction is made that the lender then carries on the negotiations. It then follows that any advice and/or misrepresentation would have come from Welcome.

Edited August 10, 2011 by MrZ

[MrZ]

AQ and fee sent first class recorded delivery. Still no reponse at all from Welcome's solicitors.

[citizenB]

I have just had a very long and freindly conversation with Capital One's legal department. They have said that they are very happy to provided a witness statement that states they acted as an introducer/broker, that Welcome was the principal, and the were the agent, and that a commission was paid to them for this service. They will also state they hold no records or indication that they would have had any negotioations with me after the introduction, and that in the normal course of events, once an introduction is made that the lender then carries on the negotiations. It then follows that any advice and/or misrepresentation was have come from Welcome.

 

Oh this is good news isnt ?

[MrZ]

Yes, it put me in much better spirits. A witness statement from them together with my statement of facts, will pretty much put Welcome and their silly "it wasnt us" defence on the back foot.

 

I knew I was right about how things transpired, but was very afraid of it being a case of my word versus theirs. With HFS/Capital One providing a witness statement supporting my statement, I dont see how Welcome can even try to defend the claim. And let's not forget that with regard to misrepresentations, the burden is on them to prove there was no misrepresentation, not mine.

 

So yes, its good!

[MrZ]

I've recieved a letter from Capital One (formely HFS Loans). Basically they are saying they need to speak to Welcome about the matter and that Welcome wont speak to them without my signed authorisation. I intend to respond by saying I am not asking for information from Welcome but from them, and remind them of the exact information I am requesting.

 

BTW, this letter came from Capital One's PPI complaints department. Apparently my original request to them was passed onto them instead of their legal department. Once I spoke to someone and explained I wasn't complaining about mis-sold PPI, they forwarded the request to the legal department. The legal department quickly rang me back and were very helpful and gave me loads of helpful information. In a nutshell they agree that Welcome are really clutching at straws in their defence.

Edited August 10, 2011 by MrZ

[steven4064]

If you can actually get them to put all this in writing then you are home and dry IMHO

 

BTW the draft directions look OK basically repeating what is in the CPR31.16 request

Edited August 10, 2011 by steven4064

[MrZ]

If you can actually get them to put all this in writing then you are home and dry IMHO

 

BTW the draft directions look OK basically repeating what is in the CPR31.16 request

 

Thanks, I was a bit worried about the directions.

 

The senior legal rep I spoke to at Capital One was very helpful, and fully understood my position. She assured me that they are 100% willing to co-operate. She said because she is on annual leave from tomorrow, she will pass everything to her deputy and ensure a letter will be sent this week summarising their position, and if required, they will also prepare a witness statement.

 

It didn't hurt that I reassured her that I had no interest in joining them as a Defendant. She readily admitted that it appears they breached the DPA by sharing my details without consent. She was also quite clear that as an "introducer" HFS would not have had any further negotiations with the customer and that the lender (whoever the lender), would be responsible for any further discussions or sales.

 

I don't want to count my chickens with only a basket full of eggs, but I cant see how Welcome could possibly try to defend the claim now. I just wander if I were to inform them that I have such a statement from Capital One, if they would have enough sense to settle.

 

EDIT: Forgot to say, the part that made me smile more than anything, was that she happily admitted that HFS received commission from Welcome, and agreed to put this in her letter as well.

Edited August 10, 2011 by MrZ

[steven4064]

I wouldn't tell WFS anything until you get the letter from Cap1

[MrZ]

I wouldn't tell WFS anything until you get the letter from Cap1

 

Oh no...I wont let the cat out of the bag until I have chickens and not just eggs. LOL

[pdb1980]

I think the phrase 'HOME RUM' could be applied here. Am so pleased you kept the faith with this. Also goes to prove what the legal people you spoke to were wrong also!

 

The fact that HFS/Capital one have told you about commission being paid to them (secret commission I might add) is brilliant I would love to be a fly on the wall when Welcome see that information. I think could even render the agreement unenforceable?

 

Welcome have constantly tried to use the 'you wont get anything from us because it was your broker who did it' line on a lot of people (including myself) as a scare tactic.

 

Their response should be interesting, very interesting indeed.

[MrZ]

I think the phrase 'HOME RUM' could be applied here. Am so pleased you kept the faith with this. Also goes to prove what the legal people you spoke to were wrong also!

 

The fact that HFS/Capital one have told you about commission being paid to them (secret commission I might add) is brilliant I would love to be a fly on the wall when Welcome see that information. I think could even render the agreement unenforceable?

 

Welcome have constantly tried to use the 'you wont get anything from us because it was your broker who did it' line on a lot of people (including myself) as a scare tactic.

 

Their response should be interesting, very interesting indeed.

 

You are so right! Even still, I dont think Welcome will give in. I can see them now trying to argue the issue of fiduciary duty or some other nonsense. Or they may try to ignore it completely. That seems to be another tactic, to just ignore everything...why, I havent a clue. Maybe the ostrich complex?

 

I still have a nagging concern about my POC. The issue of limitations or some other technicality I am not aware of. I will keep soldiering on though.

Edited August 11, 2011 by MrZ

[MrZ]

I just received an email from a Senior Legal Specialist at Capital One stating they "are working on my request and will be sending a full response as soon as possible".

[pdb1980]

I just received an email from a Senior Legal Specialist at Capital One stating they "are working on my request and will be sending a full response as soon as possible".

 

Good. It is really in the interests to do so to avoid implication in the process - giving your details out etc - They will literally do what ever you want to stay out of trouble.

 

Will you post the letter once it is done?

[MrZ]

Good. It is really in the interests to do so to avoid implication in the process - giving your details out etc - They will literally do what ever you want to stay out of trouble.

 

Will you post the letter once it is done?

 

That's the impression I got as well. They are happy that I don't want to enjoin them to the action.

 

I will definitely post the letter once I have it. Anything that might help someone else in a similar position.

[steven4064]

In my case with Welcome, I have proof of hidden commissions. There response has been total silence. For 7 months.