Moneyway Car Finance - Support During Arrears Claim

Gemmadilem34

Hi All,
Out of the blue I received a letter from Moneyway owned by Secure Trust Bank to say that they are currently reviewing the support that they offered to customers during times of arrears as they admit that they may not have supported customers as well as they could. A while back I had a £20k car loan eventually repaying £35k with interest (crazy I know); I did repay this in its entirety but I must admit there were times where I did have arrears and at one point they did give me a default which they later admitted was placed in error but did trash my credit rating for years.
I have filed a response to them taking them up on their offer to review my case however, I am really confused, what is this potentially - why would a company look into this, is this a potential compensation type claim, what sorts of pots of money will they have set aside for this? This is not the commission claim. I am just a bit confused about what I should be asking for if it is found that they did not support me during arrears which is what their letter almost confesses up to.
Any help much appreciated.

Nasqueron

What seems to have happened is, following the DCA reviews, firms have started looking at other possible failings at the same time and spotted stuff like this which they are required to be proactive about. It could mean you receive a refund or some compensation, it may mean nothing at all. If you get anything it will be unrelated to DCA and would not affect any other commission complaint. There are a few examples on the DCA forum about this topic.

ManyWays

How long ago did this car finance start? And when did it end?
You may potentially be able to make an affordability complaint about it.

Gemmadilem34

Hi there I took it out in July 2017 and it ended around December 2022 approx; was a crazy amount of interest - I knew I was signing up to it but looking back! I paid back £35k on £20k. Is it out of time to file an affordability claim? I’d probably have grounds as I have a crazy amount of loans and bills coming out when I took this finance out.

ManyWays

As it has been open in the last 6 years, the Ombudsman probably can look at it, so if Moneyway reject, send it to the Ombudsman. I havent see many car affordability complaints but I think they are much like any other loan if the finance has ended, in which case it helps a lot if you can get your bank statements for the months before the loan started. 

Nasqueron

ManyWays said:

How long ago did this car finance start? And when did it end?
You may potentially be able to make an affordability complaint about it.

Affordability concerns have been raised with the FOS and FCA for quite some time and firms have been careful on this for years - high interest rates for risky customers are a commercial decision (and the customer could walk away) and this is not something you could predict whether they'd accept it and/or rule on it, a further issue being: 

ManyWays said:

As it has been open in the last 6 years, the Ombudsman probably can look at it, so if Moneyway reject, send it to the Ombudsman. I havent see many car affordability complaints but I think they are much like any other loan if the finance has ended, in which case it helps a lot if you can get your bank statements for the months before the loan started. 

This is incorrect, we are in 2025, OP took out finance in July 2017, the 6 year rule ends in July 2023 - 6 years after taking out the product so the firm can time bar on that one. The question would be the 3 year rule - 3 years from knowing they had reason for complaint, or, crucially, when they could reasonably have been expected to know. The firm may point to annual statements of interest and other documentation that can trigger the 3 year rule too.

ManyWays

Nasqueron said:

ManyWays said:

As it has been open in the last 6 years, the Ombudsman probably can look at it, so if Moneyway reject, send it to the Ombudsman. I havent see many car affordability complaints but I think they are much like any other loan if the finance has ended, in which case it helps a lot if you can get your bank statements for the months before the loan started. 

This is incorrect, we are in 2025, OP took out finance in July 2017, the 6 year rule ends in July 2023 - 6 years after taking out the product so the firm can time bar on that one. The question would be the 3 year rule - 3 years from knowing they had reason for complaint, or, crucially, when they could reasonably have been expected to know. The firm may point to annual statements of interest and other documentation that can trigger the 3 year rule too.

It seems that FOS has changed what it does because of some recent court cases. Citizens Advice Expert Advice said this last week in an article here https://medium.com/adviser/unfair-relationships-developments-076006de31b9 :

"We’re aware that FOS is following the decisions in both Smith v RBS, and Canada Square v Potter. It appears the following can be in scope for UR claims:

• Claims about relationships that ended less than six years ago. The initial event, for example, a lending decision, commission payment, or final PPI payment, is not the starting point for time to run from"

Nasqueron

ManyWays said:

Nasqueron said:

ManyWays said:

As it has been open in the last 6 years, the Ombudsman probably can look at it, so if Moneyway reject, send it to the Ombudsman. I havent see many car affordability complaints but I think they are much like any other loan if the finance has ended, in which case it helps a lot if you can get your bank statements for the months before the loan started. 

This is incorrect, we are in 2025, OP took out finance in July 2017, the 6 year rule ends in July 2023 - 6 years after taking out the product so the firm can time bar on that one. The question would be the 3 year rule - 3 years from knowing they had reason for complaint, or, crucially, when they could reasonably have been expected to know. The firm may point to annual statements of interest and other documentation that can trigger the 3 year rule too.

It seems that FOS has changed what it does because of some recent court cases. Citizens Advice Expert Advice said this last week in an article here https://medium.com/adviser/unfair-relationships-developments-076006de31b9 :

"We’re aware that FOS is following the decisions in both Smith v RBS, and Canada Square v Potter. It appears the following can be in scope for UR claims:

• Claims about relationships that ended less than six years ago. The initial event, for example, a lending decision, commission payment, or final PPI payment, is not the starting point for time to run from"

Firms can apply a legal time bar under the 6 and 3 year rules, the FOS cannot overrule this

The two cases cited were PPI which had a special extension due to the scandal 

ManyWays

The two cases cited were PPI which had a special extension due to the scandal
But both decisions were based on the earlier unfair relationship case Patel v Patel which was about lending not PPI. If Citizens Advice says the FOS is now following the recent two Supreme Court decisions, then they probably are. 

Nasqueron

ManyWays said:

The two cases cited were PPI which had a special extension due to the scandal
But both decisions were based on the earlier unfair relationship case Patel v Patel which was about lending not PPI. If Citizens Advice says the FOS is now following the recent two Supreme Court decisions, then they probably are. 

Again, you cannot compare PPI related extensions with general finance which is subject to British law including time bars

ManyWays

@Nasqueron we dont seem to be making any progress here. Patel v Patel has been a standard Limitations Act case for many years and it has nothing to do with PPI. The two recent cases accepted Patel as the starting point and looked at whether an extension can be made in some situations, but no extension of Patel is needed for this car finance case so the fact the extensions are for PPI is irrelevant. 

It would be a great shame if @Gemmadilem34 was put off making a claim which may well be seen by the ombudsman as "in time". I cannot guarantee it will be; you cannot guarantee it wont be; so I suggest she should try.