Discretionary Commission Arrangement

dunstonh

MSE_James said:

dunstonh said:

Forget about the data access request.   It won't tell you what you need to know.   Its a complete and utter waste of time and money and Martin has been criticised frequently for using it in his template letter. 

As @MSE_JC explained a few weeks back in another thread, "The DSAR portion of the car finance reclaim email template was included following legal advice provided to MSE. However, we are continuing to pass on all feedback about the tool to the relevant team. You can also provide feedback directly via carfinance-feedback@moneysavingexpert.com ." 

It's a shame they didn't take advice from someone with regulatory knowledge and understanding.      The DSAR element of the template is creating unnecessary workloads and doesn't provide information about DCA.    Creating unnecessary costs for firms, which will likely result in consumers paying more to make up for it in future, is not very money saving.   

It also creates confusion, as can be seen on this forum, when a firm says they will not act on the DSAR or where they do, it doesn't contain anything that covers DCA.

MSE's consumer awareness on this issue is welcome, and there is no criticism there.  What it tells people to do needs some tweaking to remove the unnecessary administration.

guisygal

After sending my letter Northridge finance got back to me to say its taking longer than normal to provide you with a full response due to volume of enquiries and if my agreement with Northridge Finance was part of a DCA they will treat my communication as a formal complaint. They then say that the information requested does not constitute personal data as defined underUK General Data Protection Regulation and is therefore not a valid Data Subject Access. They seem to be holding back on telling me if I had one or not and it's only beer 1 year since I finished paying it off. They said they would get back to me in 6 weeks, which they have only to say they are still looking into your my information request and will be in touch when they have conducted their investigation. I am unsure if I need to just wait or if I should respond. Any advice would be very much appreciated.

Phoenix72

guisygal said:

After sending my letter Northridge finance got back to me to say its taking longer than normal to provide you with a full response due to volume of enquiries and if my agreement with Northridge Finance was part of a DCA they will treat my communication as a formal complaint. They then say that the information requested does not constitute personal data as defined underUK General Data Protection Regulation and is therefore not a valid Data Subject Access. They seem to be holding back on telling me if I had one or not and it's only beer 1 year since I finished paying it off. They said they would get back to me in 6 weeks, which they have only to say they are still looking into your my information request and will be in touch when they have conducted their investigation. I am unsure if I need to just wait or if I should respond. Any advice would be very much appreciated.

Since there is no FOS ruling expected until September at the earliest what's the rush
?

dunstonh

They seem to be holding back on telling me if I had one or not

That is fairly logical given the situation.

I am unsure if I need to just wait or if I should respond.

You do nothing.    You just wait.  

guisygal

Thanks, I wasn't sure if I needed to do something as others seem to have been informed if they had a DCA or not..

[Deleted User]

The level of passive aggressive responses to innocent questions is quite astounding, it's why people are asking, they don't know. If you are happy to accept that there was not a DCA on you agreement then you can take no further action.  I would reflect on two things, do you trust their response in hindsight of PPI and do you know the FCA outcome in September, or later if extended, will only affect DCAs?  People are talking as if this is already a given.  If you want to keep all of your cards on the table, you could log a complaint with VW for undisclosed commission (DCA or not) and refer it to the FOS if you are unhappy with their reply.  There are recent court appeals (published just google for them) that could affect this that are for non DCA commission.  It is not a bandwagon where there is wrongdoing consumers were unaware of, it is the consumers choice whether to take action or not.  If the lender can apply a time restraint, or say they gave you FOS rights and you didn't refer it in time, they will (a complaint that is), PPI showed all of us that lenders will do everything to restrict consumers access to information and compensation by putting up barriers or giving incorrect responses.  A previous response highlighted CYBG and their fine, a good shout, the important part of that debacle was it didn't come from on high, it was individuals and lower management making the decision to lie to consumers and the FOS, lord knows why.  My family initially had their claim for PPI rejected as there wasn't any, they took it to FOS and lo there was.  This is different, even with 'paperwork' you wouldn't see it or know if commission was there.  It comes down to how much you trust their response.  Best of luck.

Nasqueron

[Deleted User] said:

The level of passive aggressive responses to innocent questions is quite astounding, it's why people are asking, they don't know. If you are happy to accept that there was not a DCA on you agreement then you can take no further action.  I would reflect on two things, do you trust their response in hindsight of PPI and do you know the FCA outcome in September, or later if extended, will only affect DCAs?  People are talking as if this is already a given.  If you want to keep all of your cards on the table, you could log a complaint with VW for undisclosed commission (DCA or not) and refer it to the FOS if you are unhappy with their reply.  There are recent court appeals (published just google for them) that could affect this that are for non DCA commission.  It is not a bandwagon where there is wrongdoing consumers were unaware of, it is the consumers choice whether to take action or not.  If the lender can apply a time restraint, or say they gave you FOS rights and you didn't refer it in time, they will (a complaint that is), PPI showed all of us that lenders will do everything to restrict consumers access to information and compensation by putting up barriers or giving incorrect responses.  A previous response highlighted CYBG and their fine, a good shout, the important part of that debacle was it didn't come from on high, it was individuals and lower management making the decision to lie to consumers and the FOS, lord knows why.  My family initially had their claim for PPI rejected as there wasn't any, they took it to FOS and lo there was.  This is different, even with 'paperwork' you wouldn't see it or know if commission was there.  It comes down to how much you trust their response.  Best of luck.

Firms were (rightly) fined over PPI complaints where they lied about not having data (see £20m for Clydesdale). Depending on the value of the complaint you had, a lot of firms decided to set a floor limit of payouts even when they had little to no evidence of actual payments so just auto paid. This doesn't mean the car firms are all lying about not having records

The FCA are looking at this so the FOS will not take a complaint anyway.

You cannot complain that the salesman got commission and didn't tell you, that is not banned

dunstonh

The PPI issue improved significantly after the FCA carried out a review.   Before that, it was messy.    The FCA are currently carrying out a review with DCA.      Complaining about DCA now is messy.   After the review, it should be easier.   

[Deleted User]

No one is complaining that the dealer got commission and didn’t tell you. They are complaining about the lender creating and allowing the commission arrangement as it is unfair undef the CCA and in breach of CONC 4.5.2. None of the DCA investigation is anything to do with the dealers which is why all complaints and litigation is against the lenders. The dealer is just a credit broker who danced to their tune because the lender allowed it.  They created and allowed these commission arrangements and payments and as the lender on the credit agreement they are responsible. That being said there is an argument that you should complain or sue the lender purely for the commission being undisclosed but this is only being looked at properly in the courts atm not by the FCA. Yet.

Nasqueron

[Deleted User] said:

No one is complaining that the dealer got commission and didn’t tell you. They are complaining about the lender creating and allowing the commission arrangement as it is unfair undef the CCA and in breach of CONC 4.5.2. None of the DCA investigation is anything to do with the dealers which is why all complaints and litigation is against the lenders. The dealer is just a credit broker who danced to their tune because the lender allowed it.  They created and allowed these commission arrangements and payments and as the lender on the credit agreement they are responsible. That being said there is an argument that you should complain or sue the lender purely for the commission being undisclosed but this is only being looked at properly in the courts atm not by the FCA. Yet.

Your post before says this though?

Please don't suggest people sue lenders for having commission being undisclosed, it's a very costly venture for people that will result in a vast cost (and loss) for people as commission not being disclosed to customers is perfectly fine and normal, just like firms don't have to tell you the markup on goods they sell.