Claim company asking payment

Cjames_2

I had a claim company hyc look into my finances to see if I had any claims under my name. My wife's names was added in a box specifically saying add if joint account holder and she signed as 2nd as well.
We received a letter from them and from north rock that she had an individeal loan under he name that was entitles to a refund.
My wife only included her name on the form as joint account holder basis on morages and loans that we jointly held.
They are now aggressively asking her to follow through with her claim that she does not want to complete and she never agreed to looking into. (I had none by the way)
But as she is only signed with hyc as a joint account holder on the agreement they say that she signed for them to look at all her finances and make claims with them.
Can anyone help or give me some advice as I did not plan on looking into her personal finances and we checked the document thoroughly and she only filled in the box that said "only complete if joint account"

Thanks

dunstonh

My wife only included her name on the form as joint account holder basis on morages and loans that we jointly held.

Whilst that may cover the authority letter, what about the terms of contract. Did you both sign that?

It all comes down to wording on the documentation.

Cjames_2

They are only quoting the letter of authority which has conditions. They say as u did not ask for my wives finances to not be looked into they can do what they like regardless of where she signed on letter as second applicant on joint account

dunstonh

Cjames wrote: »

They are only quoting the letter of authority which has conditions. They say as u did not ask for my wives finances to not be looked into they can do what they like regardless of where she signed on letter as second applicant on joint account

The point of law will look at what is says in writing. So, read that letter and see if it allows them to include sole and joint.

Cjames_2

So if the letter dosent have small print to include it then it's irrelevant if she is the main or second signature and she has basically signed up for full disclosure of all of her finances?

dunstonh

Cjames wrote: »

So if the letter dosent have small print to include it then it's irrelevant if she is the main or second signature and she has basically signed up for full disclosure of all of her finances?

yes. They almost certainly have you on this one.

Alpine_Star

If your wife signed the LoA as joint account holder then that means it only permits HYC to look into joint accounts that bear her name alongside yours. Notwithstanding the LoA isn't the contract and she would have had to have signed a separate contract with the full terms & conditions to have any obligations to HYC under it.

dunstonh

Notwithstanding the LoA isn't the contract

Some of them do consolidate the authority and contract into one form.

If your wife signed the LoA as joint account holder then that means it only permits HYC to look into joint accounts that bear her name alongside yours.

We dont know the wording on the form.

Alpine_Star

HYC LoAs are standalone documents.

We do know the wording on their form as the OP said in post #1 that ''My wife's names was added in a box specifically saying add if joint account holder''.

Remember?

dunstonh

We do know the wording on their form as the OP said in post #1 that ''My wife's names was added in a box specifically saying add if joint account holder''.

But we dont know what the contract says and if she signed that.

Alpine_Star

It doesn't matter. The LoA only permits them to look at accounts for which she is a joint holder.