CITI/Welcome/Direct Auto FInancial Services

dannyboy1974

Any advice would be great and I will try and keep this brief!!! I went to a Yes Car Credit showroom in 2001 and went away with a car the same day. I can only really remember dealing with Welcome finance but my HP is with Associates Capital Corporation(CITI financial Europe). Well in August last year I complained to Welcome about the PPI/GAP insurance and thought they would deal with it. After them messing me about for 3-4 months they then realised that as it was an Associates HP i needed to complain to CITI. I did this and they are an absolute NIGHTMARE. You would think having a dedicated PPI dept it would be easier than some of the companies who don't. Well they have also messed me about and kept on telling me that they sold my loan to welcome they sold the liabilities as well. So in short I needed to go back to Welcome. Welcome also insisted that they only bought the loans not the liabilities. So my internet digging began and I discovered that Welcome/Cattles Plc did indeed buy my loan in 2002 and that I had been paying CITI for 17 months worth of premiums. I then discovered who the solicitors were in the sale and cheekily I phoned them as it seemed the chap in charge of Welcomes side still worked there. He said that the deal was never made public and he couldn't say either way what was sold etc BUT he did say that by the tone of his voice when I mentioned that CITI had sold the liabilities to welcome I could guess what really happened. He then put me in touch with Welcomes Company Secretary and Legal Councel. Well would you believe it he had the letter of offer with him and he read out a clause which CLEARLY states that CITI NEVER sold the liabilities at all. CITI have lied through their back teeth but as I'm sure you are all aware they weren't regulated BUT I hope that all the evidence I have sent them may kinda make them wanna do the right thing!!!

Sorry that was as short as I could make it!!!!

-taff

Forget it.

You were sold it by a company that wasn't regulated in 2001. No one has to accept liability for anything because it's the original seller that has the liability.

dannyboy1974

Thanks Taff. I was more thinking of underwriters of yes car credit or even CITI

-taff

None of them have to accept liability even if you knew who they were. The seller is responsible.

solentsusie

Hi

I did the same as you and was looking at claiming back the GAP insurance that I was missold - I even still have all of the original documentation, (although my car wasn't bought through Yes) it was an Associates loan and it was sold on to Welcome. The origininal documents have Associates written all over them.

I would be interested in any progress you make so please keep your thread updated.

Good luck.

dannyboy1974

Yeah I'll let you know how I get on. Have you complained to CITI yet??? When was your loan taken out???

Nasqueron

solentsusie wrote: »

Hi

I did the same as you and was looking at claiming back the GAP insurance that I was missold - I even still have all of the original documentation, (although my car wasn't bought through Yes) it was an Associates loan and it was sold on to Welcome. The origininal documents have Associates written all over them.

I would be interested in any progress you make so please keep your thread updated.

Good luck.

GAP insurance is not the same as PPI, if you have an issue with it, you would do better making your complaint and details in a new separate post rather than hijacking a post about a different product. GAP cover gives you the balance of the finance outstanding in the event of a write off if your insurance doesn't pay out enough to cover it thus leaving you in debt. Even if it was after 2005 you will have a harder task than a PPI complaint as there is little issue with miss-selling (the "I could have got it cheaper elsewhere" line is largely moot for the same reason that Tesco staff don't tell you that products would be cheaper at Aldi and GAP was optional but advisory for car finance)

solentsusie

Nasqueron wrote: »

GAP insurance is not the same as PPI, if you have an issue with it, you would do better making your complaint and details in a new separate post rather than hijacking a post about a different product. GAP cover gives you the balance of the finance outstanding in the event of a write off if your insurance doesn't pay out enough to cover it thus leaving you in debt. Even if it was after 2005 you will have a harder task than a PPI complaint as there is little issue with miss-selling (the "I could have got it cheaper elsewhere" line is largely moot for the same reason that Tesco staff don't tell you that products would be cheaper at Aldi and GAP was optional but advisory for car finance)

"I can only really remember dealing with Welcome finance but my HP is with Associates Capital Corporation(CITI financial Europe). Well in August last year I complained to Welcome about the PPI/GAP insurance and thought they would deal with it."

Think you need to read the first post properly. OP was talking about PPI/GAP insurance. Nobody is hijacking anything.

Perhaps the OP was in the wrong place on the forum?

Also, many of these loans were sold with GAP insurance as standard and not being given as optional. Lots of people were misled into taking out loans believing that the GAP insurance was compulsory.

Nasqueron

solentsusie wrote: »

"I can only really remember dealing with Welcome finance but my HP is with Associates Capital Corporation(CITI financial Europe). Well in August last year I complained to Welcome about the PPI/GAP insurance and thought they would deal with it."

Think you need to read the first post properly. OP was talking about PPI/GAP insurance. Nobody is hijacking anything.

Perhaps the OP was in the wrong place on the forum?

Also, many of these loans were sold with GAP insurance as standard and not being given as optional. Lots of people were misled into taking out loans believing that the GAP insurance was compulsory.

The OP mentioned GAP/PPI once and then went on to refer to a complaint about PPI to a "dedicated PPI department" - it is likely that a complaint about PPI in the PPI forum is a PPI issue, not a GAP issue.

It is considered bad manners on a forum to hijack one person's topic and post your own issue even if related because responses to one person can get mixed up with another.

Do you have any evidence that "loads of people" were sold GAP insurance as compulsory? Are you, in fact, mixing up the recent investigation into the selling of GAP insurance insurance by dealers with people being unaware they could shop around? I have not seen any reports into widespread miss-selling of GAP, only the aforementioned issue where the FCA are looking into it but there is by no means any ruling on miss-selling The process was in consultation (feedback closed on the 13th March) and they expect to introduce rules from 1st September.

http://www.fca.org.uk/news/cp14-29-guaranteed-asset-protection-insurance

Fundamentally GAP is a good idea if you are taking out car finance, if the car is written off or stolen and your insurance does not pay out enough to cover the finance then you will run into debt paying off the balance to the dealer.

If you feel you were miss-sold GAP then post a topic in the Other reclaiming forum but there are very few posts about GAP insurance let alone miss-selling (I could only see 300 in the whole forum with "gap insurance" in the text of the post) vs say the 1167 pages of posts in the PPI sub-forum.

dannyboy1974

Sorry Nasqueron but I think you'll find that the reason I only mentioned the PPI is that's the general consensus people complain about. Was Gap insurance a good idea?? Yes it was but that doesn't mean I needed it or wanted it. PPI was a good idea but yet again I didn't want it or need it. Also I know for a fact that most companies who practised selling cars to us high risk customers always added GAP insurance as it generated a lot of money for themselves. If I could complain about GAP insurance I would. Please can we stop all this hijacking crap. We are all civilised and I think solentsusie was only asking a relevant question. All we want from this forum is constructive help and advice not to be talked down to like naughty children!!!!

Nasqueron

dannyboy1974 wrote: »

Sorry Nasqueron but I think you'll find that the reason I only mentioned the PPI is that's the general consensus people complain about. Was Gap insurance a good idea?? Yes it was but that doesn't mean I needed it or wanted it. PPI was a good idea but yet again I didn't want it or need it.

If you want to complain about PPI do so. Your sale was years before regulation, 99% chance you will not get it back as it's pre-regulation and they can dismiss the complaint and you have no access to the FOS. You may get lucky with the underwriters but they have zero liability for the sale so no reason for them to refund.

It's confusing for people trying to help if you mix up what you are complaining about - is it PPI, GAP or both?

Claiming you didn't want it - unprovable and easily dismissed - it's something you would complain about within 14-30 days cooling off period not pay off for years and then years later claim it was not wanted

If you didn't need it - e.g. if you can show you had suitable cover elsewhere (such as work benefits that would cover you during long term sickness and cover the bills) - then put in a complaint with proof and see if you can get a refund (in normal cases, not pre-regulation cases).

dannyboy1974 wrote: »

Also I know for a fact that most companies who practised selling cars to us high risk customers always added GAP insurance as it generated a lot of money for themselves. If I could complain about GAP insurance I would.

Evidence of this fact? Any statistics, prosecutions by the FSA/FCA? Details of how much money this was vs the commission from selling a car?

dannyboy1974 wrote: »

Please can we stop all this hijacking crap. We are all civilised and I think solentsusie was only asking a relevant question. All we want from this forum is constructive help and advice not to be talked down to like naughty children!!!!

Thread hijacking is a common problem on forums and it is basic etiqutte not to take over one person's topic with your own issue, even if related - it can lead to mixed advice or comments relating to one thing being mistaken for another - if a person has their own complaint they should make their own topic, keeps things tidier and easier for everyone. Same principle as off topic posting, bumping old posts (especially to hijack them) and changing thread directions