Discretionary Commission confirmed on one car but not the other

DaisyNo

My husband and I bought two cars at the same time from Mercedes.  We both took out PCP deals through the same finance company.  Mercedes have said discretionary commission was paid on my husbands car but said it wasn’t paid on mine.  This seems odd that it was only paid on one.    Any ideas on how we can challenge this?

sammyjammy

hmm does seem a bit strange on the face of it, just wait is what I would say, if and when the recommendation is put in a claim then do so for both, you have nothing to lose.

dunstonh

This seems odd that it was only paid on one.

not necessarily.   For example,  being told that DCA existed is not sufficient in itself.    DCA could be used negatively, positively or neutral.   Negatively, is when they increased the interest rate.   Positively is when they lowered the interest rate.  Neutral is where the dealer could use it but didn't use it.   A lot of people who are getting DCA existed messages are going to be disappointed when they are later told that the rate was reduced rather than increased or the dealer didn't use it in their situation.

In your case, it would seem strange they would load the interest rate on one vehicle but not the other.  However, reducing it on one to aid the sale of two could make sense.    Or it could be that they needed to shift a certain volume or a model or the model was in a promotion and the rate was reduced on those particular model but not another.

  Any ideas on how we can challenge this?

You don't.   You wait until late 2025 until after the FCA report and complaints process reopens.   

DullGreyGuy

DaisyNo said:

My husband and I bought two cars at the same time from Mercedes.  We both took out PCP deals through the same finance company.  Mercedes have said discretionary commission was paid on my husbands car but said it wasn’t paid on mine.  This seems odd that it was only paid on one.    Any ideas on how we can challenge this?

Not at all odd. 

DCA is basically the garage being told they can give the loan on 4.9% APR by waiving their commission, 5.9% and get the standard £300 commission or 6.9% and get £700 commission. They'll also get commission/profit from selling the car itself. 

In one case they may have decided they thought your husband was desperate for buying the car and so could get away with a 6.9% but when dealing with you thought you were too clued up or too hard up and so offered the 5.9% or 4.9% can also be because of how the car sales commissions work that by getting your sale their overall commission stepped up so was worth more securing the sale than trying to get a higher APR accepted and possibly losing the sale. 

If you want to "challenge this" you need to accuse them of fraud and potentially liable yourself 

Nasqueron

DaisyNo said:

My husband and I bought two cars at the same time from Mercedes.  We both took out PCP deals through the same finance company.  Mercedes have said discretionary commission was paid on my husbands car but said it wasn’t paid on mine.  This seems odd that it was only paid on one.    Any ideas on how we can challenge this?

You could provide evidence that their reply is false.

Or accept that firms are not going to lie about it and face huge fines that could be more than they have to pay - remember, the FCA haven't even made a decision yet, they could say nobody is owed anything.

Having DCA may not even be a reason to pay out e.g. if they used it but it didn't affect you because it was neutral or even if it was lowered

Peanutsk

I cannot understand why Martin Lewis advised people to put a claim in and use the template on here some time ago if it will be too early as the FCA are not ruling until 2025 or have I misunderstood this

dunstonh

Peanutsk said:

I cannot understand why Martin Lewis advised people to put a claim in and use the template on here some time ago if it will be too early as the FCA are not ruling until 2025 or have I misunderstood this

Many people feel the same way.   However, things like this are great for the brand.   It guarantees tv and media coverage for years.  In his shoes, I would do the same.   

In the FCA review, they will be considering whether firms should auto-refund anyone involved without the need to raise a complaint.     So, all this rush to get complaints in is not necessary.     Even if the FCA don't force firms to be pro-active, they will lay out what is expected by firms and what consumers need to do.    

Also, firms will likely be told to bring archived data back onto systems.   So, some now being told that there are no records may find the records appear in a year or two (just as they did with PPI after the FCA told firms to do that towards the end of the PPI complaints period).

DullGreyGuy

Peanutsk said:

I cannot understand why Martin Lewis advised people to put a claim in and use the template on here some time ago if it will be too early as the FCA are not ruling until 2025 or have I misunderstood this

You have to remember that this is a for profit company, Martin sold it a long time ago but even before that it was a highly profitable site. Ultimately you get more publicity than your rivals if you are the first to do things. 

In slight fairness to them, the original pause in the complaints clock was only going to be until September this year, the pause until December next year came later and its highly likely to be pushed back further. A betting person probably could have been fairly confident that the original timescale was far too aggressive and probably never going to be met but it's still unclear when the clock will start ticking again.