Advantage Finance - HP Car failed after 1yrs - still paying - HELP

[ads_uk]

Email sent & reply just received stating I have been granted an extension til 30 January 2014

[theoldrouge]

Good, got a few thoughts on this which IMO is unen anyway, but of course fos will not rule on that,will say more on jan22 just got to give them a prod in the right direction

[dx100uk]

you guys might like to go help here please:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?415464-Court-Papers-for-VT-d-car-Advantage-finance-help!

 

dx

[theoldrouge]

ads going to start on this tomorrow,

 

could you please confirm

 

the date you scrapped the car, and

the amount you had paid and

the amount of arrears on that date.

 

Got a good few ideas with this,

 

I would suggest I do a proposed letter to the fos which you can then send,

amend or ignore if you wish

!- they have been reeled in by darren and co

and seem to think they have negotiated a wonderful settlement for you:-)

[ads_uk]

Date Of Scrapped Car: 06 Jan 2012

Amount of which paid @ 06 Jan 12: £2,698.86 (Total Amount Paid to date: £2,823.36)

 

Looking through the SAR,

there is a Statutory Arrears Notice Dated 25/11/2011 (last one received prior to scrappage),

this states Current Balance £5,556.20, Arrears Balance: £1,291.42

 

As per the original agreement

payments were 48.57pcm for MBI/GAP + 110.65 for the car = £159.22pcm

 

These figures on the Arrears Notice also include the MBI/GAP that was eventually refunded & Charges.

 

VT Settlement figures also included MBI/GAP then Charges (even when both of them removed it was still same value)

 

I've had multiple VT settlement figures quoted by Darren and the others

and different market valuations of how much the car is worth despite it being scrapped.

[theoldrouge]

so 680 plus 478 removed in charges and ins total £1158,

 

so we need to convince fos VT date 6/1/12 and car value 0,

and in addition fully explain flaws in agreement,

and vt concept

and suggest suitable settlement of zero,

 

so will write suggested letter from a slightly different prospective to what you have already supplied-does that seem ok?

[ads_uk]

Yeah 680 of MBI/GAP (no Interest) and 478 of charges.

 

Post #287 - shows the various VT values quoted and how I have questioned them due to not taking into account the 680, 478 & the fact the a scrapped car has Zero value.

 

Advantage and the Fos letter stated about "Funds received upon scrapping the car are to be paid to Advantage" - I received no funds, no receipt just the Scraping certificate - How can I prove I received nothing?

 

Thinking about it as Advantage gave permission to scrap then that is them accepting a zero value of the car and hence a completion of the VT as they could of collected and scrapped them selves.

[theoldrouge]

yes ads,

your last sentence is really the crux of the vt,

the date and the scrap value,

these seem to be the root cause of your problem throughout.

 

There is a somewhat disputed but never appealed county court judgement that at least gives support to this view which can be included in the suggested letter.

 

Could you please confirm that your actual agreement that you signed is in exactly the same format as the pre contract copy that you have posted as the agreement,

and also are the t&cs that you have already posted (for the hp ag and the insuarnce) all of the original t&cs

[ads_uk]

Pre Contract? That is the actual agreement that is posted (both copies) and yes the T&C's are as stated on the agreements - no amendments or changes to the t&c's at any time.

 

Which is what makes me laugh when Darren decided to quote what my agreement stated and was completely incorrect.

 

Question, If I was a seller and I changed the goal posts on values etc would than mean I was committing a fraudulent act, if so, why can a business?

[theoldrouge]

ok ads, suggested reply as promised

 

- Thank you for your response to my complaint in the above reference,

the contents of which have been noted.

 

I have studied your comments in detail, but do not feel that you have yet reached a fair and reasonable conclusion to this matter.

 

I therefore wish to bring to your attention several further details

and would ask you to examine my complaint again in depth,

taking these matters into account.

 

Before I list my further points, and whilst I fully appreciate that you are unable to comment

on the enforceability or otherwise of my agreement,

I beleive it is necessary to first examine the very basis of my agreement

with Advantage Finance (AF), as its shortcomings have acted as a prelude to their subsequent conduct of my account.

 

The Agreement that I was asked to sign was a multiple agreement under s18 CCA 1974,

and in order to conform with the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983, Schedule 1

,must have two seperate headings in bold, distinguishing type.

 

A HP Agreement regulated by the CCA1974, AND A Credit Agreement Regulated by the CCA1974.

 

On examination you will find that my agreement only has one such heading,

An HP Agreement regulated by the CCA1974 and was treated as such on many occasions by AF,

which was not only grossly misleading to myself,

but also in breach of s60(1) and (2) CCA1974 and s61(1)a

-a document in the prescribed form itself containing all the prescribed terms and conforming

to regulations under section 60(1),

and of course both these types of agreement have very different rights,duties and obligations.

 

Indeed the only mention of a credit agreement is in the small print in the signature on page 2.

 

AF have seriously mislead themselves on a number of occasions,

as evidenced by their incorrect and misleading correspondence already supplied to yourselves

when they include both the HP and Insurance figures in their VT calculations,

and constantly refering to only an HP agreement in their correspondence.

 

I now turn to the VT itself.

 

As a layperson with no previous knowledge of the CCA1974,when in my letter of 15/12/2011,

I requested AF permission to scrap the vehicle,I as any reasonable person would believe

,that on receipt of their approval, this was sufficent to terminate the agreement.

 

A Judgement in Leicester County Court in July 2002 in the case of Rover Finance v Siddons confirms this view.

In judgement District Judge Eaton implied that it was not neccessary to submit a formal request under s99 CCA1974,

in order to complete a VT under s100.

Indeed Goode Consumer Credit Law and Practice concurs with this.

 

I therefore contend that VT took place on 6/1/2012, the date of scraping the vehicle.

 

I now turn to the value of the vehicle.

 

In their letter of 4/10/2013 AF have used Glasses Guide to determine the value.

This is plainly wrong.

Glasses Guide refers only to vehicles in roadworthy and running condition,

mine, through no fault of my own was neither.

 

I had purchased Mechanical Breakdown Insurance via the "credit agreement" from AF to cover such eventualities

but due to the onerous conditions attached to this insurance, it was impossible for me to claim.

 

I therefore maintain that I received no funds on scraping the vehicle and the value of the vehicle was zero.

Indeed AF themselves were at this time at liberty to collect and sell the vehicle themselves,

something they chose not to do.

 

This brings me to the calculations when considering a VT on 6/1/2012.-

Amount to

VT £2823.10

+Arrears at 6/1/2012 £1291.42

+Value of Vehicle £0,

Total £4114.52.

 

Less amount paid £2823.36

+refund in respect of charges and insurance £1158,

Total £3981.36.

 

This leaves a total to complete the VT of £133.16

- a vastly different figure to that quoted to yourselves by AF,

and one which shows their offer of settlement in a totally different light.

 

I therefore suggest, taking into account the flawed and confusing agreement,

the misleading and inaccurate information supplied by AF,

and the distress caused and time spent on trying to resolve this matter,

that a fair and reasonable settlement figure would indeed be £0.

 

I therefore request that given these further matters,

you look again in detail at my complaint.

 

Yours etc............

[dx100uk]

I've spaced the letter

tor, you might find it easier to copy n paste from notepad?

 

all your msgs are always a block of text?

 

anyhow side issue

great letter.

 

dx

[theoldrouge]

thanks for doing that dx, sorry Im old and very low tech,never learnt how to copy and paste, will have to ask one of the grandsons to teach me:-)

[ads_uk]

Thank you so much.

Even though I don't understand the rules and regulations, I've actually had to go hmmm lol

 

Now tgat I've got the case workers email address I will email it her... May ring as well and ask for other emails such as her superior etc

[theoldrouge]

Pleasure ads Good Luck

[ads_uk]

This is becoming comical....

 

Here is my new reply from FOS.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]49363[/ATTACH]

 

So a scrapped vehicle does have a value? nothing about advantage not collecting - and "Did not receive scrap page certificate" then what the hell is that they sent in the SAR scotch mist?????

 

I've read through this twice and its as confusing as a letter from MR Young... its like advantage has written it as it only contains the points they want to talk about.

 

what next?

[theoldrouge]

well shes made her mind up and

 

although we can argue each and every paragraph of her reply,

 

I fear nothing you can say is going to change it.

 

Just a few points for starters,

the agreement breaches s60 and s61, but hey thats just a technicality,

 

next how dare you bring this up anyway,

and as to case law we ignore that as well,

 

oh and lets just throw in the value of the car is what it should have been worth, not its actual value!!!

 

You are going to have to request an ombudsman looks again at this-

you can provide them with the scrappage proof,

 

vt must be confirmed as the date the car was scrapped with AFs permission,

by any standards the ag would have terminated that day,

further info can be provided about the mech ins and car value,

and more can be made of AFs various settlement figures.

 

I can only suggest a further letter pointing all this out for an ombudsman

to look at unless anyone else has any ideas?

[ads_uk]

I've slept and yep I'm still angry and confused.

It's in black and white everyting that raises alarm bells with this, but I fail to understand how none of the information I've provided or points that were made by yourself was not looked into.

 

I feel let down on this especially when she's stated no "scrappage certificate" was provided - yet its in the SAR, as mentioned in earlier post its like its been written by a member of advantage as none of the points were made out.

 

What do I do to get someone else at the ombudsman to investigate this?

 

I'd like to include the SAR pointing out the Certificate & also ask as to why none of the points that were made was deemed irrelevant.

 

I wish to thank you all again for your help regarding this, I can only apologize for the length and time this is going on for someone to see advantage are wrong on so many levels.

[theoldrouge]

ads, can you post up the original letter you sent to AF requesting scrapping the car and also their reply. Is it in anyway possible to approach whoever collected and scrapped the car and request some kind of doc by way of receipt showing why nothing was paid for it? eg collection charges?

[ads_uk]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]49380[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]49381[/ATTACH]

 

 

attached is the certificate and Advantages reply.

 

The request to scrap was over the phone as indicated in the letter.

The bottom of the certificate states the values charged -- ie None.

[theoldrouge]

ads thanks, may need more time again to reply to her needs alot of thinking about

[ads_uk]

I will say that I am still not happy with the decision and would like more time to reply to her in the fullest.

 

I also noticed how nothing was mentioned about advantage collecting the car -- if they think it held a value then they should of picked it up instead of scrapping it.

 

Thanks again.

[ads_uk]

And her response:

 

"I shall extend the date for a further week to the 10 March 2014 and look forward to hearing from you."

[theoldrouge]

excellent ads, though I dont think she may actually be" looking forward to hearing from you":lol:

[ads_uk]

 

I'm still trying to figure out what is she seeing that I'm not.

[theoldrouge]

you treat all front loaded things as ppi

 

however if you paid £48.57PCM thats what you use in the SI spready

just list EVERY payment you have made to date

and inc you want it cancelled

 

dx

ads, do you have a copy of your INSURANCES spreadsheet? will save me doing it all over again. Also which date is given on your sar for AFs receipt of scrappage certificate?- the more I read back through this , Darrens letters of 8/2/2013 and 4/4/2013 should be enough to sink AFs case-will have to highlight them in new letter so it comes to the attention of an ombudsman