MSE's reclaim mis-sold car finance loans for FREE guide

facade

I really can't see the issue.

When you buy a car outright, you can pay for it with cash, or borrow the cash i.e. finance it.

If you finance it everybody knows that the finance arranged through the dealer costs more than a decent rate bank loan, because the finance company make their money on the interest, and pay the dealer a commision.

The only possible misleading is somehow telling people that they are "buying" a car with monthly PCP payments when really they are hiring it, unless they opt to buy it by paying the balloon, and conveniently not mentioning the balloon amount.

Mis-selling would be convincing them to buy a Ferrari F40 to transport a family of 6 everywhere, or at a stretch convincing them that it is cheaper to "buy" the car on a PCP deal than just get a bank loan or pay for it.

motorguy

facade said:

I really can't see the issue.

When you buy a car outright, you can pay for it with cash, or borrow the cash i.e. finance it.

If you finance it everybody knows that the finance arranged through the dealer costs more than a decent rate bank loan, because the finance company make their money on the interest, and pay the dealer a commision.

The only possible misleading is somehow telling people that they are "buying" a car with monthly PCP payments when really they are hiring it, unless they opt to buy it by paying the balloon, and conveniently not mentioning the balloon amount.

Mis-selling would be convincing them to buy a Ferrari F40 to transport a family of 6 everywhere, or at a stretch convincing them that it is cheaper to "buy" the car on a PCP deal than just get a bank loan or pay for it.

The mis-selling aspect would come in when the dealer opts to offer the customer a finance deal with a higher rate of finance because that finance company is offering them more commission.

Herzlos

They usually do focu

motorguy said:

The mis-selling aspect would come in when the dealer opts to offer the customer a finance deal with a higher rate of finance because that finance company is offering them more commission.

That's not mis-selling though, that's just selling. You buy a thing for x, sell it for y, and y-x is profit.

Unless the dealer mislead the buyer somehow; like the flat rate / apr thing which makes the finance sound about half the rate, the details were all provided on paper.

facade

Herzlos said:

That's not mis-selling though, that's just selling. You buy a thing for x, sell it for y, and y-x is profit.

Unless the dealer mislead the buyer somehow; like the flat rate / apr thing which makes the finance sound about half the rate, the details were all provided on paper.

Exactly, AFAIK there is no legal requirement for the dealer to find the purchaser a "cheap" loan, making £££££££ off the punter is the whole point of being in retail!

Even saying "This 95% APR loan is the cheapest you can get" isn't mis-selling, because it is the cheapest that they will get through the dealer, not the cheapest on the market.

alkyste

Can you still claim if it's a mobility car finance 

Nearlyold

alkyste said:

Can you still claim if it's a mobility car finance 

Aren't they leases and not loans now. I know you could get HP in the past for a Motability Car though I think it was offered at the same interest rate for everyone.

AndyH1972

How far back can you go? I bought a nearly new car in 1993 with HP finance, other cars before that but I don't remember who the finance company was or have the paperwork anymore

Ectophile

facade said:

Herzlos said:

That's not mis-selling though, that's just selling. You buy a thing for x, sell it for y, and y-x is profit.

Unless the dealer mislead the buyer somehow; like the flat rate / apr thing which makes the finance sound about half the rate, the details were all provided on paper.

Exactly, AFAIK there is no legal requirement for the dealer to find the purchaser a "cheap" loan, making £££££££ off the punter is the whole point of being in retail!

Even saying "This 95% APR loan is the cheapest you can get" isn't mis-selling, because it is the cheapest that they will get through the dealer, not the cheapest on the market.

If a company is acting as a credit broker, then they have legal responsibilities to the customer.  https://www.fca.org.uk/firms/credit-broking-rules They are not allowed to rip off cutomers, acting against their best interests.

facade

Ectophile said:

facade said:

Herzlos said:

That's not mis-selling though, that's just selling. You buy a thing for x, sell it for y, and y-x is profit.

Unless the dealer mislead the buyer somehow; like the flat rate / apr thing which makes the finance sound about half the rate, the details were all provided on paper.

Exactly, AFAIK there is no legal requirement for the dealer to find the purchaser a "cheap" loan, making £££££££ off the punter is the whole point of being in retail!

Even saying "This 95% APR loan is the cheapest you can get" isn't mis-selling, because it is the cheapest that they will get through the dealer, not the cheapest on the market.

If a company is acting as a credit broker, then they have legal responsibilities to the customer.  https://www.fca.org.uk/firms/credit-broking-rules They are not allowed to rip off cutomers, acting against their best interests.

Yes, I get that now, having read past the hype & clickbait.

The whole thing is entirely because financial products are so tightly regulated, and mis-selling in this context means "not acting in accordance with the rules" .

I now await my free money from the cars I bought on dealer brokered finance in 1993 & 2003.  

Hopefully lenders will be compelled to automatically refund rather than creating millions of pounds worth of business for the middlemen.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] said:

• Paying over the odds due to commission. You might've been sold a deal that was more expensive because your dealer stood to earn a hefty commission by charging you more.

How do you prove that? What evidence can you provide that they inflated the price or that you could somehow have qualified for a better deal?

• The dealership/finance company didn't check you could afford the loan. The company selling you car finance MUST examine your finances to ensure you can afford it.

In the last 6 years (or more but 6 years for the purposes of the 6 year rule) they would have gone through the cost in detail with anyone buying the car, particularly since they became regulated

• The car wasn't fit for purpose, as described, or was just downright faulty.

This isn't being miss-sold finance

• In 2021, more than 9,000 car finance complaints were brought to the FOS, of which 40% were found in favour of the customer.

The FOS page says that they look at all sorts of complaints, from faulty car to unsuitable mileage allowances, to end of agreement charges - this does not mean the 40% of complaints were saying finance was miss-sold. Look at the case studies - someone complained that they were charged for handing back a car that they'd scratched!

The FOS gives some ludicrous decisions too - "Claire" said she was not aware of the mileage limit on the HP

We noted that the agreement clearly showed there was an annual mileage cap of 6,000 miles and that Claire had signed it. 
We thought it more likely than not that Claire didn’t know that there was a mileage cap in the agreement.

Google "red hand rule". Vitality important stuff like that has to be clearly pointed out to the customer.

In her case she could probably show that she normally did more than 6k miles a year, so wouldn't have agreed to it if she had known. Sales staff try really hard to avoid having customers read contracts, and they nearly got away with it.

I know you love to rant about personal responsibility, but this has been the law for a century now.