Welcome says My £12k CCA Regulated secured Loan will now become a mortgage!

[theoldrouge]

imo you were refunded the charges because there was no legal basis in the agreement for any default charges

 

what are you hoping to achieve in the long run?

 

what are the current circumstances surrounding the ac?

[dx100uk]

don't forget MIF can be reclaimed too.

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?318323-Old-Welcome-Debt&highlight=postggj

.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?304631-Welcome-Finance-PPI-and-Mr-Z&highlight=reclaim+MIF

.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?251405-Welcome-Secured-Loan-agreement.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?304631-Welcome-Finance-PPI-and-Mr-Z&highlight=reclaim+MIF.

.

As per the post above the MIF is not for insurance. Welcome have admited on more than a few occassions that it is not insurance....Never has been, never will be.

.

The real question is where does the money go? They will tell you its a fee in relation to being a higher risk, and that by charging this fee, and the interest it attracts, it helps to cover them in the event of a shortfall. They will also tell you that whilst many lenders do use the fee to purchase insurance, they never have.

.

This is not only stated in the Griffith v Welcome case, but I also have it in writing directly from them.

"The MIF is a fee that can be charged by lenders when the value of loans secured on a property is at a level similar to the value of the property.

.

It is an additional form of protection for the lender in the event that they are required to repossess the property and are unable to recover all of the monies are outstanding under an agreement (i.e. there is a shortfall).

.

In such circumstances, the lender is entitled to pursue the borrower for the shortfall.

.

As can be seen by the terms and conditions of your agreement, you were charged a MIF, which meant that should the situation described above arise you would not be pursued for any shortfall.

.

This was not an insurance policy although some lenders do take out insurance policies for this purpose.

.

It was what could be described as a 'waiver fee'. It was decided in Griffiths -v- Welcome Financial Services (2006) EWHC 3769 (QB) that the charging of the fee by a lender but not actually taking out an insurance policy was entirely reasonable."

.............

collected from some thread on here .

.

dx

.

The MIF has not been tested in court as far as I know, I certainly will be testing it though, its a big part of my claim against them.

..

 

Last edited by MrZ; 16th August 2011 at 19:35.

.

I too am uncertain of the legalities regarding the MIF.

.

I have seen and read the threads I can find about it.

.

I started a separate thread, which is now merged with this one specifically asking about the MIF.

.

This is what I have been able to gather so far pertaining to the MIF.

.

1. Its been said that it should only be applied to mortagages or secured loans of 25,000.00 or more.

(I have not seen and regulation yet that states this)

.

2. Its been said that it should be 75% loan to value (I have not seen any regulation that states this)

.

3. mortgage Indeminty Fee is a fee to be used to purchase insurance.

(This is not a regulation per se, but rather an industry norm.

mortgage lenders will charge this fee and then use the fee to purchase insurance to protect against a shortfall)

.

4. In the case of Welcome, they are not using this fee to purchase insurance.

(I have yet to see any explanation from Welcome as to why they charge the fee)

.

5. Welcome are treating this fee as a Charge for Credit and it attracts interest at the same daily rate or AIR.

.

So having gathered the above information from this forum and other resources,

it is my intention to write Welcome regarding only the MIF.

.

I will not include it as part of any other complaint or claim,

as I want to ensure it doesnt get "muddled over" or lost amongst other issues.

.

I dont want to give them room to wriggle out of an explanation.

.

I am drafting the letter today and will definitely update this thread once I have a reply.

.

MIF is a fee the debtor pays incase there is a shortfall on the loan

.

this fee is an insurance policy/product

.

you paid for it so ask welcome for the insurance policy.

i can tell you now there will be none

.

it goes into welcomes own pot under WELCOME ELITE BROKERS

.

YOU NEED TO BE ASKING WELCOME WHO THIS MONEY WAS PAID TO AND DEMAND PROOF VIA ANPOLICY NUMBER AND DATE AND WHO THIS FEE WAS PAID TO

.

ILL LAY EVEN MONEY NORWICH UNION/AVIVA

.

[Baz1994]

imo you were refunded the charges because there was no legal basis in the agreement for any default charges

 

what are you hoping to achieve in the long run?

 

what are the current circumstances surrounding the ac?

 

cheers again theoldrouge

 

So that would also apply to the added MIF, PPI and Acceptance fee would it not ?

 

I am challenging the enforcement of the Credit Agreement and Legal Charge on our property.

As previously mentioned I have evidence that Welcome deemed that they were exempt from requesting permission from our mortgage lender to be added as a charge on our property.

Surely this is not legal and above board ?

 

don't forget MIF can be reclaimed too.

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?318323-Old-Welcome-Debt&highlight=postggj

.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?304631-Welcome-Finance-PPI-and-Mr-Z&highlight=reclaim+MIF

.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?251405-Welcome-Secured-Loan-agreement.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?304631-Welcome-Finance-PPI-and-Mr-Z&highlight=reclaim+MIF.

.

As per the post above the MIF is not for insurance. Welcome have admited on more than a few occassions that it is not insurance....Never has been, never will be.

.

The real question is where does the money go? They will tell you its a fee in relation to being a higher risk, and that by charging this fee, and the interest it attracts, it helps to cover them in the event of a shortfall. They will also tell you that whilst many lenders do use the fee to purchase insurance, they never have.

.

This is not only stated in the Griffith v Welcome case, but I also have it in writing directly from them.

"The MIF is a fee that can be charged by lenders when the value of loans secured on a property is at a level similar to the value of the property.

.

It is an additional form of protection for the lender in the event that they are required to repossess the property and are unable to recover all of the monies are outstanding under an agreement (i.e. there is a shortfall).

.

In such circumstances, the lender is entitled to pursue the borrower for the shortfall.

.

As can be seen by the terms and conditions of your agreement, you were charged a MIF, which meant that should the situation described above arise you would not be pursued for any shortfall.

.

This was not an insurance policy although some lenders do take out insurance policies for this purpose.

.

It was what could be described as a 'waiver fee'. It was decided in Griffiths -v- Welcome Financial Services (2006) EWHC 3769 (QB) that the charging of the fee by a lender but not actually taking out an insurance policy was entirely reasonable."

.............

collected from some thread on here .

.

dx

.

The MIF has not been tested in court as far as I know, I certainly will be testing it though, its a big part of my claim against them.

..

Last edited by MrZ; 16th August 2011 at 19:35.

.

I too am uncertain of the legalities regarding the MIF.

.

I have seen and read the threads I can find about it.

.

I started a separate thread, which is now merged with this one specifically asking about the MIF.

.

This is what I have been able to gather so far pertaining to the MIF.

.

1. Its been said that it should only be applied to mortagages or secured loans of 25,000.00 or more.

(I have not seen and regulation yet that states this)

.

2. Its been said that it should be 75% loan to value (I have not seen any regulation that states this)

.

3. mortgage Indeminty Fee is a fee to be used to purchase insurance.

(This is not a regulation per se, but rather an industry norm.

mortgage lenders will charge this fee and then use the fee to purchase insurance to protect against a shortfall)

.

4. In the case of Welcome, they are not using this fee to purchase insurance.

(I have yet to see any explanation from Welcome as to why they charge the fee)

.

5. Welcome are treating this fee as a Charge for Credit and it attracts interest at the same daily rate or AIR.

.

So having gathered the above information from this forum and other resources,

it is my intention to write Welcome regarding only the MIF.

.

I will not include it as part of any other complaint or claim,

as I want to ensure it doesnt get "muddled over" or lost amongst other issues.

.

I dont want to give them room to wriggle out of an explanation.

.

I am drafting the letter today and will definitely update this thread once I have a reply.

.

MIF is a fee the debtor pays incase there is a shortfall on the loan

.

this fee is an insurance policy/product

.

you paid for it so ask welcome for the insurance policy.

i can tell you now there will be none

.

it goes into welcomes own pot under WELCOME ELITE BROKERS

.

YOU NEED TO BE ASKING WELCOME WHO THIS MONEY WAS PAID TO AND DEMAND PROOF VIA ANPOLICY NUMBER AND DATE AND WHO THIS FEE WAS PAID TO

.

ILL LAY EVEN MONEY NORWICH UNION/AVIVA

.

 

Cheers again dx and I have already put to Welcome regarding the MIF but replies so far have been rather vague or trying to avoid the issue.

[Baz1994]

Just a couple of quick questions for any experts or those with anything similar - I am receiving correspondences from Dial4ALoan Limited c/o Welcome Finance regarding an ongoing complaint.

 

What is the relationship between the two ?

 

I was recently corresponding direct with Welcome complaints department but now receiving letters from Dial4ALoan Ltd ?

 

Thank-you for looking

[silverfox1961]

Hi sorry you were missed.

 

While I cannot find any direct link to WF, they do share the same address so it may be that they are part of the same company.

 

On the paperwork you received from Dial4aloan, does it give a FCA registration number?

 

I have checked the WF listing and there is nothing about dial4aloan.

[silverfox1961]

ROBERT DAVID EAST

 

This guy is a director of both companies. Both are inactive companies so all they are doing is collecting debts.

[Baz1994]

ROBERT DAVID EAST

 

This guy is a director of both companies. Both are inactive companies so all they are doing is collecting debts.

 

Thanks and no worries silverfox.

 

Well letter is headed dial4aloan, address stated is Dial4aloan Limited c/o Welcome Financial Services Limited

 

Registered No:03958533

 

I am sure that they are all owned by the Cattles Group plc but when check the above they are still active ?

[Baz1994]

Didn't want to start a new thread so going on from my last post I wondered if anyone can assist in a couple of questions thanks.

 

If the original WFS loan encountered some issues and was agreed to freeze interest going forward but still pay the same monthly amount - Would this be construed as a re-write ? And if so should there have been a new agreement of some sort ?

 

I do have WFS agreement in writing and it has been passed to the Financial Ombudsman regarding my existing complaint regarding the handling of my account.

[dx100uk]

no

 

 

dx

[Baz1994]

OK cheers dx for that.

 

I was a bit concerned that they might try wriggling out of it as only got a couple of years to pay and hit me with the interest owing.

[Baz1994]

Just an up-date regarding my loan.

 

I have now been contacted on a weekly basis (voicemail messages) by someone at Welcome Slough to call them to discuss some early repayment offers.

 

Today I received a text from WFS asking me to contact the manager to talk about some potential opportunities regarding the outstanding loan.

 

Has anyone received anything similar ?

 

Considering my existing complaints would this imply anything untoward or am I just clutching at straws ?

 

I also never received any annual statements prior to 2012, would I still have a case for failure to comply even though they have already frozen interest ?

[sillygirl1]

Don't discuss things on the phone with them unless you can record the conversation. Let them know if you do call that the call will be recorded.

[Baz1994]

Thanks sillygirl1

 

No I always reject or don't answer their calls but starting to get text messages now.

 

I usually contact them in writing only and request that they do the same, yet they still phone me on my mobile (they do not have my landline number).

 

Perhaps I will have to send another harassment and dispute of account letter.

 

I have an ongoing PPI and other complaints with them in which is with the ombudsman at the moment hence my question regarding as to why they decided to freeze interest on the account.

 

I did previously mention that I did not receive any annual statements from WFS - Should I submit another complaint on this basis and would I still be entitled to having interest refunded ?

[theoldrouge]

What do the t&cs of your original mortgage agreement say as regards second charges?

[Baz1994]

Thanks theoldrouge I will try and find them and see.

 

For some reason I thought that they would have had to notify the original lender.

[theoldrouge]

Normal procedure would be indeed to send the first mortgagee a questionnaire

 

So let's see what the agreement says

[Baz1994]

Apologies if I have posted under wrong section.

 

If a loan company fails to provide any annual statements since 2008 and are in breach of the above, how is any refund calculated ?

 

Is it just purely all interest paid for the said period or is there also additional payment due ?

 

Thank-you for looking.

[obiter dictum]

You claim it back at contractual interest

 

You are talking of 86(d) CCA i take it and not a section 77 ??

Edited October 13, 2015 by obiter dictum

[Baz1994]

Thanks obiter dictum.

 

Well lender has admitted not supplying annual statements from 2008 to 2012.

 

Therefore is it just a refund total of interest payments made for that period ?

 

Also is there a standard worded template letter for this type of complaint ?

 

Thank-you

[obiter dictum]

Then get claiming back all those charges and compound contractual interest

 

That is way over my head figures such as that

 

I am sure something called Dull cal has been mentioned before

 

Someone will be around soon and give a link

[AndyOrch]

You claim it back at contractual interest

 

You are talking of 86(a) CCA i take it and not a section 77 ??

 

Think you are getting confused here with 86B obiter dictum

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/86B

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/86A Is with regards to the OFT to prepare information sheets on arrears and default

 

Baz a section 77 request is for a copy of the agreement and an up to date statement of account...

 

Regards

 

Andy

[obiter dictum]

My mistake

 

Thanks andy

 

Hope i got it right this time:-)

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/86D

[AndyOrch]

Almost 86D is Failure to give notice of sums in arrears...not to fail to give statements:-)

[Peterbard]

No you were rght the first time it is section 77A

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/77A

 

There have been many cases where this has been used,

 

it has been invoked when statments have been presented but did not contain the required information.

 

Interest and any charges for the period of none compliance is due.

 

More info here

 

http://www.bitterwallet.com/oft-secures-179m-of-fee-refunds-for-consumers-from-non-compliant-lenders/73417

[AndyOrch]

Is there a reason Baz you have not had a statement for 7 years ?

 

Who is the creditor ? Are you in any arrears ? has the debt been assigned?

 

77A

 

(4)The creditor is not required to give the debtor any statement under this section once the following conditions are satisfied—

 

(a)that there is no sum payable under the agreement by the debtor; and

 

(b)that there is no sum which will or may become so payable.

 

Regards

 

Andy