Loancheck/Watsons Solicitors

millwallpaul

When petermb contacted me, he never mentioned anything other than claiming my PPi. It wasn't until it was passed to loancheck that I realised it wasn't as simple as that and they were trying to claim brokers fees etc.

As maxdp has said, if I only knew then what I do now, I would never have trusted any of them and gone the FOS route instead.

maxdp

marshallka wrote: »

I thought petermb always said that if all you want is PPI then FOS but if you want all the other stuff back then to use them? I know that whenever I saw him post he always said that people who wanted more than PPI he could assist for free win or lose.

No that is not what he said, or to me anyway he was always on about undisclosed fees and commission that as far as I was aware was what he was on about. When he messaged me no mention was made of it. It was only when the agents came round and I saw the letter that the loan was questioned.

marshallka

millwallpaul wrote: »

When petermb contacted me, he never mentioned anything other than claiming my PPi. It wasn't until it was passed to loancheck that I realised it wasn't as simple as that and they were trying to claim brokers fees etc.

As maxdp has said, if I only knew then what I do now, I would never have trusted any of them and gone the FOS route instead.

I just know from looking back at the posts that he always said that there was far more to claim than just PPI and he could help with it. My problem was like you that my broker was not regulated but he was open and up front in that he was going for commissions and trying to make agreements unenforceable from what I can remember of his posts. I know that some on here could have used FOS (unlike me and you) and they actually chose for the other route cause he claimed they would get far more back.

maxdp

I think sometimes the problem is that when you first start reading all this stuff sometimes people do not have the confidence to claim it back. Now, we know how easy it is to do this but as a newbie it can be scary.

Anyway hopefully it will all come out in the wash as they say.

marshallka

maxdp wrote: »

I think sometimes the problem is that when you first start reading all this stuff sometimes people do not have the confidence to claim it back. Now, we know how easy it is to do this but as a newbie it can be scary.

Anyway hopefully it will all come out in the wash as they say.

Thats what Gunforhire said. It will all come out in the wash. I just know that Loancheck was always about more than just PPI and sometimes it can attract someone wanting more than just PPI. Petermb mentioned commissions paid to brokers and also the interest paid on the loan etc. I never ever thought that he ever just claimed back PPI. I thought he was also very open about what he said he knew.

maxdp

I am not really sure about that, I was aware later on but not when I first passed the claims over to him. All come out in the wash was just a saying and did not remember gun for hire saying that. For anybody interested I kept the thread that Homer j and Petermb started so if anyone is interested in what they were saying.

As I said i knew it was interest plus commission etc. The rest was a complete mystery when I first joined this FORUM. As you can see from the dates I had already handed my details over in about Jan 2008
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=930311

marshallka

maxdp wrote: »

I am not really sure about that, I was aware later on but not when I first passed the claims over to him. All come out in the wash was just a saying and did not remember gun for hire saying that. For anybody interested I kept the thread that Homer j and Petermb started so if anyone is interested in what they were saying.

As I said i knew it was interest plus commission etc. The rest was a complete mystery when I first joined this FORUM.
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=930311

When I first joined here I was pm'd by petermb who told me that he could help but I first wanted to try with FOS and told him I would get back to him if I decided otherwise. He told me about undisclosed commissions BUT I did have a commission on my SAR from FOS but it was not charged to me on my agreement.

I was determined to do it alone but was struggling and he then got in touch again some time later after trying on my own. I always knew that they did unenforceable agreement things BUT only after being told by FOS that my broker was unregulated and they could not help. I am just glad that I never signed up to them. He did however have a copy of my agreement which he told me was "destroyed" when I said I did not want to go ahead. I was actually tempted at one time but then my "head" kicked in and I told him I did not want anymore back than what was right and fair and that was my FULL PPI that was charged on my loan. Anything else just would not have felt right.

I even argued with a few on here about uneforceability in that some were just seeing it as a way of avoiding their debts and nothing about struggling with FOS for their PPI.

Petermb never tried to hide the fact that he was working for more than PPI back.

OH and he told me that he could get back £9K (which was actually lower than just the PPI that I paid with interest) which I found strange. He also told me that my copy agreement that had been sent to me would need to be forced (I was arguing use of rule 78) as FIrstplus sent me a front copy and then a copy of my terms and conditions which were not the original terms and conditions from when I took the loan. This happened to a few in the early days when using rule 78 and they never mentioned it in the original T & C's so I was wanting this letter actually "forced" the lender (yeah right). Never got one other than the one I had sent to them anyway and certainly could not be enforced on a settled loan as section 77/78 etc did not stand for "settled loans". Something else he got wrong which I have tried to say so many times on site.

maxdp

marshallka wrote: »

When I first joined here I was pm'd by petermb who told me that he could help but I first wanted to try with FOS and told him I would get back to him if I decided otherwise. He told me about undisclosed commissions BUT I did have a commission on my SAR from FOS but it was not charged to me on my agreement.

I was determined to do it alone but was struggling and he then got in touch again some time later after trying on my own. I always knew that they did unenforceable agreement things BUT only after being told by FOS that my broker was unregulated and they could not help. I am just glad that I never signed up to them. He did however have a copy of my agreement which he told me was "destroyed" when I said I did not want to go ahead. I was actually tempted at one time but then my "head" kicked in and I told him I did not want anymore back than what was right and fair and that was my FULL PPI that was charged on my loan. Anything else just would not have felt right.

I even argued with a few on here about uneforceability in that some were just seeing it as a way of avoiding their debts and nothing about struggling with FOS for their PPI.

Petermb never tried to hide the fact that he was working for more than PPI back.

Well at least you were able to in the end by trying different avenues get your PPI back. I have to say when I first joined I did not know anything about unenforceable agreements and voidable agreements etc. I did not have any loans apart from a mortgage and I had a Barclaycard which had a limit of about 200.00:o. Anyway as you are aware I was claiming for OH and Business Partner and I just wanted these settled for them really.

One seems now to be sorted. The other I have a meeting later in the week and I am going to ask lots of questions that I feel have not been explained or justified. I will post up what they say but that would obviously only be the case for this claim. It is for the PPI plus other which I am still confused about. They want to discuss it at the meeting.

I just think the more information that is posted on here then perhaps others who have been with Loancheck will have an avenue to save the day as it were. I do appreciate what you say Marshallka that some wanted everything back.

maxdp

What do you mean by forced Marshallka?

marshallka

maxdp wrote: »

Well at least you were able to in the end by trying different avenues get your PPI back. I have to say when I first joined I did not know anything about unenforceable agreements and voidable agreements etc. I did not have any loans apart from a mortgage and I had a Barclaycard which had a limit of about 200.00:o. Anyway as you are aware I was claiming for OH and Business Partner and I just wanted these settled for them really.

One seems now to be sorted. The other I have a meeting later in the week and I am going to ask lots of questions that I feel have not been explained or justified. I will post up what they say but that would obviously only be the case for this claim. It is for the PPI plus other which I am still confused about. They want to discuss it at the meeting.

I just think the more information that is posted on here then perhaps others who have been with Loancheck will have an avenue to save the day as it were. I do appreciate what you say Marshallka that some wanted everything back.

I would have gone for more back IF i could not claim back my missold PPI as Firstplus were a rip off and still fighting now for rule 78 BUT cannot get an actual real copy of the agreement (no-one can force the lender on a settled loan!!) as I would need that to fight in court.I

I still want another £4K back that charged at redmeption of the loan cause of the rule of 78 being used. I even told Petermb about getting someone to look into rule 78 which was actually abolished because it WAS/IS unfair and oppresive to the consumer. No-one could argue that one as being greedy cause it was both the above and found to be by the OFT. It was a penalty that was charged and if settling a loan today then would be only two months interest maximum. Anyone actually going after a bank was always covered by FOS and most would know that too. Unregulated broker complaints are now being made against the insurers so that is that "hopefully" sorted.

Like I say, I always knew that what petermb did was to try to get agreements unenforced/voided/commissions and that is why so many went ahead with him instead of first trying the FOS. It was made to sound like you were stupid if you "just" went for the PPI. I wonder who is laughing though now!! Mind you I still think money was made by some and lots of it.