Financial Ombudsman Service, VT Issue & Credit Rating

[Deleted User]

Hello,

I have searched this forum but haven't found an answer specific to what's happening with me at the moment. I have had an ongoing dispute with BMW Financial Services, who have been trying to get £908 out of me, and I've gone down all the correct routes to resolve this. I've disputed it directly with them since I voluntarily terminated the account, then referred the case to the Financial  Ombudsman Service (6 months ago actually and I still haven't had a response). But I'm still getting chased by BMW and they are being completely uncooperative. 

My issue is that, while I am waiting for the FOS decision, BMW are marking my credit file each month. They are marking "missed payments" despite the fact I voluntarily terminated the account in September 2019. I know I have the option to just pay off the debt, but I do not feel it's fair that whilst disputing it in the correct way by going to the FOS, they have marked my file, and it's still not resolved 6 months later. My credit rating is now really bad. BMW have even sold my debt on to a collection agency, although to be fair to that agency, they have stopped chasing me when they found out it's being disputed with the Ombudsman Service. I just don't know why BMW can't do the same and take the marks off my file until a decision has been made. If I just wasn't paying for no reason then I'd understand but they know it's being investigated.

I just don't know what to do here. My credit is already affected now, but I don't feel that while it's being investigated they should have marked my file in the first place. Is there anything I can do to dispute this or am I just going to have to wait for the Ombudsman decision? I will phone them tomorrow to chase it up, but I don't know how long it takes for them to investigate. I feel like I have been waiting a while now, having put the complaint to them in November 2019! I just don't see how it's fair that whilst I'm waiting for an outcome, each month my credit rating is getting worse.

Thank you - Hope everyone is keeping safe and well with everything else going on recently.

DrEskimo

What are they saying the £908 is for?

MinuteNoodles

DrEskimo said:

What are they saying the £908 is for?

My guess is excess mileage and they VT'd in the hope of avoiding an excess mileage bill. OP might find it doesn't work out the way they're hoping.

Back on topic. You currently owe money, you've not paid it and therefore the entries are correct. You can file a note with the credit agencies to say this is in dispute but they'll still stay there until the ombudsman rules in your favour and if they don't they'll be permanently there.

[Deleted User]

MinuteNoodles said:

DrEskimo said:

What are they saying the £908 is for?

My guess is excess mileage and they VT'd in the hope of avoiding an excess mileage bill. OP might find it doesn't work out the way they're hoping.

Back on topic. You currently owe money, you've not paid it and therefore the entries are correct. You can file a note with the credit agencies to say this is in dispute but they'll still stay there until the ombudsman rules in your favour and if they don't they'll be permanently there.

Your guess is *not* correct, but thank you for the assumption! I VT'd because I was getting another car and wanted to end the contract early by a couple of months - there's no way on earth I'd purposely go through all of this to try and avoid a bill since it's been extremely stressful. But despite that, I'm not just going to let a finance company to bully me out of money that I should not owe. It's actually damage charges for small scratches on the car which are wear and tear related, since I had the car for over 4 years, but their inspection standards are horrific to get as much money as possible out of the customer. Since I VT'ed the agreement, the credit markers are factually incorrect because the account does not have "missed payments" - there is no account to miss payments on. The entries are not correct. I've followed all the correct procedures here, I've disputed the alleged debt, I have taken it up with the Ombudsman, and I am willing to pay the "debt" if it's ruled in their favour, so I don't know why they are not willing to take these markers off my file until a resolution is found. I'm not just going to pay something readily because a big company wants to try and take my money or bully me into it without being reasonable and communicating with me, when I have paid them in good faith and on time for 4 years. Anyway I can see what kind of opinion you have on this so no point continuing this conversation. 

NekoZombie

Until the FOS rule in your favour, BMW are correctly reporting on your credit file that your account is delinquent.  At the point that FOS say that BMW have got it wrong, BMW will also be told to correct your credit file. 

[Deleted User]

jr2093 said:

MinuteNoodles said:

DrEskimo said:

What are they saying the £908 is for?

My guess is excess mileage and they VT'd in the hope of avoiding an excess mileage bill. OP might find it doesn't work out the way they're hoping.

Back on topic. You currently owe money, you've not paid it and therefore the entries are correct. You can file a note with the credit agencies to say this is in dispute but they'll still stay there until the ombudsman rules in your favour and if they don't they'll be permanently there.

Your guess is *not* correct, but thank you for the assumption! I VT'd because I was getting another car and wanted to end the contract early by a couple of months - there's no way on earth I'd purposely go through all of this to try and avoid a bill since it's been extremely stressful. But despite that, I'm not just going to let a finance company to bully me out of money that I should not owe. It's actually damage charges for small scratches on the car which are wear and tear related, since I had the car for over 4 years, but their inspection standards are horrific to get as much money as possible out of the customer. Since I VT'ed the agreement, the credit markers are factually incorrect because the account does not have "missed payments" - there is no account to miss payments on. The entries are not correct. I've followed all the correct procedures here, I've disputed the alleged debt, I have taken it up with the Ombudsman, and I am willing to pay the "debt" if it's ruled in their favour, so I don't know why they are not willing to take these markers off my file until a resolution is found. I'm not just going to pay something readily because a big company wants to try and take my money or bully me into it without being reasonable and communicating with me, when I have paid them in good faith and on time for 4 years. Anyway I can see what kind of opinion you have on this so no point continuing this conversation. 

If you post again, please can you just ask for the replies you want to hear - makes it much easier for people to skip your posts. Also, you aren't being "bullied" - you damaged property that doesn't belong to you and BMW think you should pay for the repair. You'll have to wait out the process if you don't think you should pay. 

molerat

And how does the damage fit within the guidelines ? What you think is fair wear and tear may not be what is accepted within the industry standard, see P13  https://issuu.com/bfwsn67/docs/fwt_2013_issuu_bmw_group_financial_?mode=embed&viewMode=presentation&layout=http://skin.issuu.com/v/light/layout.xml&backgroundColor=FFFFFF&showFlipBtn=true

Nebulous2

Have you put a formal complaint to BMW? That would be the route I would go down. A complaint to BMW that it isn’t missed payments, and then a complaint to the ICO that BMW are wrongly using your data. 

PaulW922

camelot1971 said:

jr2093 said:

MinuteNoodles said:

DrEskimo said:

What are they saying the £908 is for?

My guess is excess mileage and they VT'd in the hope of avoiding an excess mileage bill. OP might find it doesn't work out the way they're hoping.

Back on topic. You currently owe money, you've not paid it and therefore the entries are correct. You can file a note with the credit agencies to say this is in dispute but they'll still stay there until the ombudsman rules in your favour and if they don't they'll be permanently there.

Your guess is *not* correct, but thank you for the assumption! I VT'd because I was getting another car and wanted to end the contract early by a couple of months - there's no way on earth I'd purposely go through all of this to try and avoid a bill since it's been extremely stressful. But despite that, I'm not just going to let a finance company to bully me out of money that I should not owe. It's actually damage charges for small scratches on the car which are wear and tear related, since I had the car for over 4 years, but their inspection standards are horrific to get as much money as possible out of the customer. Since I VT'ed the agreement, the credit markers are factually incorrect because the account does not have "missed payments" - there is no account to miss payments on. The entries are not correct. I've followed all the correct procedures here, I've disputed the alleged debt, I have taken it up with the Ombudsman, and I am willing to pay the "debt" if it's ruled in their favour, so I don't know why they are not willing to take these markers off my file until a resolution is found. I'm not just going to pay something readily because a big company wants to try and take my money or bully me into it without being reasonable and communicating with me, when I have paid them in good faith and on time for 4 years. Anyway I can see what kind of opinion you have on this so no point continuing this conversation. 

If you post again, please can you just ask for the replies you want to hear - makes it much easier for people to skip your posts. Also, you aren't being "bullied" - you damaged property that doesn't belong to you and BMW think you should pay for the repair. You'll have to wait out the process if you don't think you should pay. 

The poster came here for help not to be attacked and to have sweeping assumptions made about their situation 

[Deleted User]

PaulW922 said:

camelot1971 said:

jr2093 said:

MinuteNoodles said:

DrEskimo said:

What are they saying the £908 is for?

My guess is excess mileage and they VT'd in the hope of avoiding an excess mileage bill. OP might find it doesn't work out the way they're hoping.

Back on topic. You currently owe money, you've not paid it and therefore the entries are correct. You can file a note with the credit agencies to say this is in dispute but they'll still stay there until the ombudsman rules in your favour and if they don't they'll be permanently there.

Your guess is *not* correct, but thank you for the assumption! I VT'd because I was getting another car and wanted to end the contract early by a couple of months - there's no way on earth I'd purposely go through all of this to try and avoid a bill since it's been extremely stressful. But despite that, I'm not just going to let a finance company to bully me out of money that I should not owe. It's actually damage charges for small scratches on the car which are wear and tear related, since I had the car for over 4 years, but their inspection standards are horrific to get as much money as possible out of the customer. Since I VT'ed the agreement, the credit markers are factually incorrect because the account does not have "missed payments" - there is no account to miss payments on. The entries are not correct. I've followed all the correct procedures here, I've disputed the alleged debt, I have taken it up with the Ombudsman, and I am willing to pay the "debt" if it's ruled in their favour, so I don't know why they are not willing to take these markers off my file until a resolution is found. I'm not just going to pay something readily because a big company wants to try and take my money or bully me into it without being reasonable and communicating with me, when I have paid them in good faith and on time for 4 years. Anyway I can see what kind of opinion you have on this so no point continuing this conversation. 

If you post again, please can you just ask for the replies you want to hear - makes it much easier for people to skip your posts. Also, you aren't being "bullied" - you damaged property that doesn't belong to you and BMW think you should pay for the repair. You'll have to wait out the process if you don't think you should pay. 

The poster came here for help not to be attacked and to have sweeping assumptions made about their situation 

Subjective; there's no bullying or assuming here.
Regular members here help everyone, they critique the information based on the original post and years of experience in such matters, emotion doesn't come into it, it helps no-one, the facts do.
Unless full facts from all parties are known advice is going to be of limited use here, full information from the car company and FOS need to be known before much else can be done.