Contacted regarding missold PCP

[Deleted User]

Tiptop79 said:

My point about the APR was that I didn't believe it was negotiable, much like when you apply for a credit card and the rate they give you is not negotiable.  

The reason for not going anywhere else for finance was that I didn't know I could and that if I have been offered that rate by the dealer, a credit check had been conducted so it would be the same wherever I go. Perhaps even worse as a search had been done on my file. 

I've always had company cars and didn't know anything about car finance etc.

What doesn't seem fair is that someone has potentially been paid more for overcharging me on interest and not making that clear.  It's funny how they tried to get me to sell my car back to them after two years and told me they could do a better finance deal and I was on one of the highest they had seen. 

I didn't sell it back to them btw. 

APR is not negotiable, you get offered what the lender deems acceptable
You didn't know you could go elsewhere for finance - that is your issue, not miss-selling. Waitrose don't need to tell customers you can get the same product cheaper at Aldi. A bit of research would have told you that you could get the finance elsewhere 
A single credit check will not stop you being able to apply for credit for another type of finance, particularly a soft check before the hard check when you agree to the finance.

You were not overcharged on interest, you paid what the firm deemed right for their risk. 2 years later your credit was presumably better or their lending criteria was relaxed as you had been paying it fine for 2 years. What happened 2 years after the original sale is moot.

k3lvc

Daniel2curtis said:

Has anyone got any further through with this other than initial submission of documents?

They won't (and anyone who tells you they have is likely to have a vested interest)

As others have said above this is purely a number generating exercise at the moment before they launch a pressure offensive on the manufacturers/financiers

If it ever makes it to court (and even more unlikely a settlement) you're looking at years rather than months

Daniel2curtis

Deleted_User said:

Tiptop79 said:

My point about the APR was that I didn't believe it was negotiable, much like when you apply for a credit card and the rate they give you is not negotiable.  

The reason for not going anywhere else for finance was that I didn't know I could and that if I have been offered that rate by the dealer, a credit check had been conducted so it would be the same wherever I go. Perhaps even worse as a search had been done on my file. 

I've always had company cars and didn't know anything about car finance etc.

What doesn't seem fair is that someone has potentially been paid more for overcharging me on interest and not making that clear.  It's funny how they tried to get me to sell my car back to them after two years and told me they could do a better finance deal and I was on one of the highest they had seen. 

I didn't sell it back to them btw. 

APR is not negotiable, you get offered what the lender deems acceptable
You didn't know you could go elsewhere for finance - that is your issue, not miss-selling. Waitrose don't need to tell customers you can get the same product cheaper at Aldi. A bit of research would have told you that you could get the finance elsewhere 
A single credit check will not stop you being able to apply for credit for another type of finance, particularly a soft check before the hard check when you agree to the finance.

You were not overcharged on interest, you paid what the firm deemed right for their risk. 2 years later your credit was presumably better or their lending criteria was relaxed as you had been paying it fine for 2 years. What happened 2 years after the original sale is moot.

It's not quite like that. It's like waitrose having a tomato for 50p and telling you that you're not allowed to try and use sainsburys to buy that tomato. 

ontheroad1970

Daniel2curtis said:

Deleted_User said:

Tiptop79 said:

My point about the APR was that I didn't believe it was negotiable, much like when you apply for a credit card and the rate they give you is not negotiable.  

The reason for not going anywhere else for finance was that I didn't know I could and that if I have been offered that rate by the dealer, a credit check had been conducted so it would be the same wherever I go. Perhaps even worse as a search had been done on my file. 

I've always had company cars and didn't know anything about car finance etc.

What doesn't seem fair is that someone has potentially been paid more for overcharging me on interest and not making that clear.  It's funny how they tried to get me to sell my car back to them after two years and told me they could do a better finance deal and I was on one of the highest they had seen. 

I didn't sell it back to them btw. 

APR is not negotiable, you get offered what the lender deems acceptable
You didn't know you could go elsewhere for finance - that is your issue, not miss-selling. Waitrose don't need to tell customers you can get the same product cheaper at Aldi. A bit of research would have told you that you could get the finance elsewhere 
A single credit check will not stop you being able to apply for credit for another type of finance, particularly a soft check before the hard check when you agree to the finance.

You were not overcharged on interest, you paid what the firm deemed right for their risk. 2 years later your credit was presumably better or their lending criteria was relaxed as you had been paying it fine for 2 years. What happened 2 years after the original sale is moot.

It's not quite like that. It's like waitrose having a tomato for 50p and telling you that you're not allowed to try and use sainsburys to buy that tomato. 

Nonsense.  You can purchase your car from anywhere you please, and finance it accordingly.  You just have to do due diligence and do your research first.  You wouldn't buy your house without doing a survey and getting the best deal you can before committing, so why do people not have the same attitude with usually the second purchase of their lives?  Naivety? Ignorance? Or something else?  I'd call it unwise and a severe risk to your financial health.  

motorguy

Daniel2curtis said:

Deleted_User said:

Tiptop79 said:

My point about the APR was that I didn't believe it was negotiable, much like when you apply for a credit card and the rate they give you is not negotiable.  

The reason for not going anywhere else for finance was that I didn't know I could and that if I have been offered that rate by the dealer, a credit check had been conducted so it would be the same wherever I go. Perhaps even worse as a search had been done on my file. 

I've always had company cars and didn't know anything about car finance etc.

What doesn't seem fair is that someone has potentially been paid more for overcharging me on interest and not making that clear.  It's funny how they tried to get me to sell my car back to them after two years and told me they could do a better finance deal and I was on one of the highest they had seen. 

I didn't sell it back to them btw. 

APR is not negotiable, you get offered what the lender deems acceptable
You didn't know you could go elsewhere for finance - that is your issue, not miss-selling. Waitrose don't need to tell customers you can get the same product cheaper at Aldi. A bit of research would have told you that you could get the finance elsewhere 
A single credit check will not stop you being able to apply for credit for another type of finance, particularly a soft check before the hard check when you agree to the finance.

You were not overcharged on interest, you paid what the firm deemed right for their risk. 2 years later your credit was presumably better or their lending criteria was relaxed as you had been paying it fine for 2 years. What happened 2 years after the original sale is moot.

It's not quite like that. It's like waitrose having a tomato for 50p and telling you that you're not allowed to try and use sainsburys to buy that tomato. 

It seriously isnt.  At no point will the dealer / finance company tell you you're "not allowed" to get finance elsewhere.

If someone shops at Waitrose and they dont bother / dont try checking Sainsburys / elsewhere for a better price, thats not mis-selling by Waitrose.

Grey_Critic

Having read the various posts I think the *Class Action* will probably go nowhere fast. - You buy on the day at a price (or interest rate in this case) that you agree with - If the price goes up tomorrow you pat yourself on the back if it goes down then you kick yourself.

The Diesel miss-selling  thing is just the same.

The legal profession are not known to be always decent, honest and truthful. Someone has seen an opportunity to make money - most likely off people like you.

The same applied to the Payment Protection thing - You could actually do it yourself for nothing. IF this case were to come to court and find in favour then you could simply submit your own claim - IF they succeed they will charge you a fee to get your own money back - that’s what they did with Payment Protection.

Purpleee

Deleted_User said:

Tiptop79 said:

My point about the APR was that I didn't believe it was negotiable, much like when you apply for a credit card and the rate they give you is not negotiable.  

The reason for not going anywhere else for finance was that I didn't know I could and that if I have been offered that rate by the dealer, a credit check had been conducted so it would be the same wherever I go. Perhaps even worse as a search had been done on my file. 

I've always had company cars and didn't know anything about car finance etc.

What doesn't seem fair is that someone has potentially been paid more for overcharging me on interest and not making that clear.  It's funny how they tried to get me to sell my car back to them after two years and told me they could do a better finance deal and I was on one of the highest they had seen. 

I didn't sell it back to them btw. 

APR is not negotiable, you get offered what the lender deems acceptable
You didn't know you could go elsewhere for finance - that is your issue, not miss-selling. Waitrose don't need to tell customers you can get the same product cheaper at Aldi. A bit of research would have told you that you could get the finance elsewhere 
A single credit check will not stop you being able to apply for credit for another type of finance, particularly a soft check before the hard check when you agree to the finance.

You were not overcharged on interest, you paid what the firm deemed right for their risk. 2 years later your credit was presumably better or their lending criteria was relaxed as you had been paying it fine for 2 years. What happened 2 years after the original sale is moot.

Isn't the argument that according to FCA rule they were not allowed to unjustifiably charge such a high APR? Is it not the same as no one being allowed to charge uxorious interest rates on a loan? Happy to be corrected, and I didn't relate to the whole tomato/Waitrose analogy

Daniel2curtis - Any update?

Daniel2curtis said:

Thanks. I'll try and remember to update people on the outcome. These pcp claim websites are all over the Web and I havent found one report of a successful claim, or to be fair one report that someone has been scammed either. It almost feels like they are building up a massive amount of claims/data. 
I've chased it up twice recently and got an identical response both times about how I'm in the first stage of claim and it might take months for the financial company to reply blah blah blah. 

[Deleted User]

Purpleee said:

Deleted_User said:

Tiptop79 said:

My point about the APR was that I didn't believe it was negotiable, much like when you apply for a credit card and the rate they give you is not negotiable.  

The reason for not going anywhere else for finance was that I didn't know I could and that if I have been offered that rate by the dealer, a credit check had been conducted so it would be the same wherever I go. Perhaps even worse as a search had been done on my file. 

I've always had company cars and didn't know anything about car finance etc.

What doesn't seem fair is that someone has potentially been paid more for overcharging me on interest and not making that clear.  It's funny how they tried to get me to sell my car back to them after two years and told me they could do a better finance deal and I was on one of the highest they had seen. 

I didn't sell it back to them btw. 

APR is not negotiable, you get offered what the lender deems acceptable
You didn't know you could go elsewhere for finance - that is your issue, not miss-selling. Waitrose don't need to tell customers you can get the same product cheaper at Aldi. A bit of research would have told you that you could get the finance elsewhere 
A single credit check will not stop you being able to apply for credit for another type of finance, particularly a soft check before the hard check when you agree to the finance.

You were not overcharged on interest, you paid what the firm deemed right for their risk. 2 years later your credit was presumably better or their lending criteria was relaxed as you had been paying it fine for 2 years. What happened 2 years after the original sale is moot.

Isn't the argument that according to FCA rule they were not allowed to unjustifiably charge such a high APR? Is it not the same as no one being allowed to charge uxorious interest rates on a loan? Happy to be corrected, and I didn't relate to the whole tomato/Waitrose analogy

Daniel2curtis - Any update?

Daniel2curtis said:

Thanks. I'll try and remember to update people on the outcome. These pcp claim websites are all over the Web and I havent found one report of a successful claim, or to be fair one report that someone has been scammed either. It almost feels like they are building up a massive amount of claims/data. 
I've chased it up twice recently and got an identical response both times about how I'm in the first stage of claim and it might take months for the financial company to reply blah blah blah. 

The FCA has no such rule that companies cannot charge high APR, companies can charge what they like whether it's 0%, 10% or even -10% if they were daft. Lenders give whatever rate their algorithm says they should - someone with poor credit history is deemed a risk of default, so they get charged more so the company covers their losses if the person defaults.

The analogy is that if I got into Waitrose to buy a tin of tomatoes (same as me going to a car dealership to buy a car), the person at the till (or the car salesman) doesn't have to tell me that I could go to Aldi and get the same product for less (just as the car salesman has no obligation to tell you that you could arrange finance from a bank). Claiming that you didn't know that there are other finance packages available or that you didn't shop around is not a reason for miss-selling

Purpleee

Deleted_User said:

Purpleee said:

Deleted_User said:

Tiptop79 said:

My point about the APR was that I didn't believe it was negotiable, much like when you apply for a credit card and the rate they give you is not negotiable.  

The reason for not going anywhere else for finance was that I didn't know I could and that if I have been offered that rate by the dealer, a credit check had been conducted so it would be the same wherever I go. Perhaps even worse as a search had been done on my file. 

I've always had company cars and didn't know anything about car finance etc.

What doesn't seem fair is that someone has potentially been paid more for overcharging me on interest and not making that clear.  It's funny how they tried to get me to sell my car back to them after two years and told me they could do a better finance deal and I was on one of the highest they had seen. 

I didn't sell it back to them btw. 

APR is not negotiable, you get offered what the lender deems acceptable
You didn't know you could go elsewhere for finance - that is your issue, not miss-selling. Waitrose don't need to tell customers you can get the same product cheaper at Aldi. A bit of research would have told you that you could get the finance elsewhere 
A single credit check will not stop you being able to apply for credit for another type of finance, particularly a soft check before the hard check when you agree to the finance.

You were not overcharged on interest, you paid what the firm deemed right for their risk. 2 years later your credit was presumably better or their lending criteria was relaxed as you had been paying it fine for 2 years. What happened 2 years after the original sale is moot.

Isn't the argument that according to FCA rule they were not allowed to unjustifiably charge such a high APR? Is it not the same as no one being allowed to charge uxorious interest rates on a loan? Happy to be corrected, and I didn't relate to the whole tomato/Waitrose analogy

Daniel2curtis - Any update?

Daniel2curtis said:

Thanks. I'll try and remember to update people on the outcome. These pcp claim websites are all over the Web and I havent found one report of a successful claim, or to be fair one report that someone has been scammed either. It almost feels like they are building up a massive amount of claims/data. 
I've chased it up twice recently and got an identical response both times about how I'm in the first stage of claim and it might take months for the financial company to reply blah blah blah. 

The FCA has no such rule that companies cannot charge high APR, companies can charge what they like whether it's 0%, 10% or even -10% if they were daft. Lenders give whatever rate their algorithm says they should - someone with poor credit history is deemed a risk of default, so they get charged more so the company covers their losses if the person defaults.

The analogy is that if I got into Waitrose to buy a tin of tomatoes (same as me going to a car dealership to buy a car), the person at the till (or the car salesman) doesn't have to tell me that I could go to Aldi and get the same product for less (just as the car salesman has no obligation to tell you that you could arrange finance from a bank). Claiming that you didn't know that there are other finance packages available or that you didn't shop around is not a reason for miss-selling

Sorry if I wasn't clear - As grumpychap explained on the first page, companies aren't allowed to charge higher rates to buttress their own commission. So I agree, and to relay what he wrote, the rate should only be determined by the customer's creditworthiness, if a rate is sky high due to bad credit then fair enough, however that hasn't happened, the rate was inflated for their own financial gain

In terms of that analogy, I understood it, I just didn't agree with it and didn't think it was appropriate for this particular scenario

sheramber

if a rate is sky high due to bad credit then fair enough, however that hasn't happened, the rate was inflated for their own financial gain

That is what you have to prove to make a claim.