First plus ripoff

ceebeeby

How many customers are there approximately?

Is there nothing we can collectively do? I've also had the letter?

What about radical action - all stop paying at once - if they're that heavily in debt, will they fold?

kimpeck

I personally don't agree about "not paying them" ...... two wrongs do not make a right. If they are proved in breach I would like the terms "clear" and the APR recalculated from the loan start date. But until there is a clear "ruling" then I will be paying my commitments as normal.

I would suggest you join the complaints website.

skintmumofone

Hi I have been reading all your posts with great interest.

I too have a FP loan and trying to reclaim the PPI over 2 loans one I paid off with the 2nd loan anyhoo....

I also received a letter yesterday saying my rate is increasing it will be about £20 more a month.

I also have received previous letters re the BOE base rate etc however when this decreased to 0.5% etc the loan stayed the same. Do you think if thousands of people hadnt been claiming PPI the rates would have been lowered?

My complaint is with the Ombudsman just now and am waiting for an adjudicator. Have no idea how long it will take to sort this out but just want it resolved and also I feel if they are increasing the rate they will probably get money out of us and the money they paid out in PPI they will recouperate it with their extortionate % rates!:mad::mad:

russt2000

hi Smoo, no they are not raising it just because of ppi claims, they pulled out of the market because the time of big houses prices was dropping like a stone for one, so their loan to house value formula just didnt work for them , the ppi is a big thorn in their side but not the main reason for the rate rises, there have been arounfd 14 15 sub prime lenders who did the same , they will all come out of the wood work if and when prices go up again.

shafted_fpc

agree with russt here it is I think now becoming apparent that this ratcheting up of interest rates was part of the bussiness model for BFP.

I would note that the imparment charge excuse is that, what they are saying is becouse we lent inprudently we are now going to have to raise interest rates becouse our costs have gone up, in fact as there direct funding comes from the parent company and there abilty to raise money on the markets is linked to that companys their costs actually have come down.

the logical thing to asume is that at the present they are mitigating loses that they incured thro mis selling PPI by increasing interest rates however whilst this would be an awfull thing for them to do it is in fact even worse in my opinion, that is the whole business model was disigned to rip people of

shafted_fpc

just to add a bit

Firstplus loans

let me put is simply Barclays Firstplus are a bunch of liars, and fraudsters, this is not opinion it is fact and it is stated as fact in the full and certain knowledge of its truth. Further more it is stated as such in knowledge of all disclaimers on this Website re liability, and that if BFP were to sue it would be me they sued.

I can say this with absolute confidence that there will be no effective action against me.

Why because I know they lied

for example in the Key facts doc they supplied with the loan re PPI they said “ no fee”
yet they took 70% commission, how do I know this because they had to pay the Taxman after first using an Eire based company to handle the sale of PPI in order to pay less tax.

The sale of insurance is meant to be done in utmost good faith they didn't sell in good faith and therefore apart from any claim re misrepresentation act 1967 in common law this is Fraud

They mis sold polices and 99% of complaints are upheld,

The contract terms where written in such a way as to maximise their earnings and hide the true cost to the customer, that is clause 12 re further advances, the use of rule of 78, and clause 7 re interest rates.

At the same time the loan was sold as affordable, reducing monthly payments etc, at best this was a half truth the clause re interest rates was always designed to ratchet up interest rates over the life of the loan, the use of rule 78n was always there to trap people in and the further advance clause was always there to rip people of on further lending which they would market to people, to the extent of doing it within the loan agreement.



Where I not a new member I would post up links that would demonstrate what I am saying, I would also post up a link to the no10 E petition for you to sign.

halifax71

That was a bit restrained for you Shafted :rotfl:

shafted_fpc

That would be coz I am on my best behaviour children may be viewing this.
Also you know am new here, so don't want to call them a bunch of cheating shysters followed by a load of expletives quite yet.

Yer and If I were to liken them to something really bad like tripe then my dog might have a go as she likes tripe or indeed tripe manufacturers might sue me or indeed BFP may sue me and being as being lier's and fraudsters inst as bad as being tripe could win.

In that case I would have to sell the house to pay the costs of course that would be after any shortfall on the second charge they hold for my property, which is there in part due to their fraudulent lies


BTW could everyone sign the petitionwhat you do istype it in as I cant put up a link yet
the http then has a n oblique petitions.number10.gov.uk (another oblique) FirstPlusRates (and another)

shafted_fpc

ILW wrote: »

And the lesson for today is-
Never agree to, or sign anything unless you have read and understand what you are agreeing to.

with the particulear clause in question the lesson for the near future will be never write a clause that is a decietfull ambigouse lump of dog mess

ILW

shafted_fpc wrote: »

with the particulear clause in question the lesson for the near future will be never write a clause that is a decietfull ambigouse lump of dog mess

As said before, if you did not agree with this clause, why did you agree to it?