PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

tiggrae

marshallka wrote: »

Just received this from the FOS in GIBRALTAR

Dear Mr and Mrs

Thank you for your enquiry.

I can confirm that Bespoke Finance Limited is not regulated by this Commission.
Bespoke Finance Limited is a Gibraltar company (Incorporation No.60921). You can obtain further details about the company from Companies House in Gibraltar ([URL="file://\\www.companieshouse.gi"]www.companieshouse.gi[/URL])
Loan finance (lending) is not a regulated activity in Gibraltar and therefore this Commission has a very limited locus in this matter.
Yours sincerely.
Albert Yome
Manager, Fiduciary Services & Enforcement
Financial Services Commission
PO Box 940
Suite 943 Europort
Gibraltar
Tel: (+350) 200 40283
Fax: (+350) 200 40282
E-Mail: [EMAIL="ayome@fsc.gi"]ayome@fsc.gi[/EMAIL]
Http: [URL="file://\\www.fsc.gi"]www.fsc.gi[/URL]
This e-mail and the information it contains may be privileged and/or confidential. It is for the intended addressee(s) only. The unauthorised use, disclosure or copying of this e-mail, or any information it contains, is prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal offence. If you have received this e-mail in error, please return it to the sender by e-mail.


This about Bespoke is just a scam by Freedom Finance. Surely this is a legal matter that the FOS SHOULD deal with. Firstplus ALLOWED this to go on in the firstplace and after all it was them that they were selling for. I cannot believe that they should be allowed to get away with this. I have a hunch that all us that think we rang Firstplus in the first place and now are told went through a broker may not have gone through a broker. It just all seems very fishy. Have Firstplus sold the loans and got some sort of deal going with this company knowing that we have not got a leg to stand on. So much is getting unbelievable. I have yet for either of them to prove freedom finances?bespoke finances involvement at the time of the actual loan.

unfortunately, the FOS would have to stick to their rules which say they cannot look at a complaint before the company came under the jurisdiction of the FSA - which for both companies was 15th January 2005

marshallka

tiggrae wrote: »

unfortunately, the FOS would have to stick to their rules which say they cannot look at a complaint before the company came under the jurisdiction of the FSA - which for both companies was 15th January 2005

What...both Firstplus and Freedom. I thought Firstplus was regulated way before that. Even if the FOS cannot help there surely is some governing body that can help with this s**t of a company. I told the FOS my dates and they still said to send in my complaint. Why did they do that if they already knew they were going to say no to me.

I have gone to the FOS about the rule of 78 and unfair credit etc. I note that the OFT said that unregualted lenders should stop using the rule of 78 as it was unfair and oppressive to the borrower and this was in 1997 and they used it on me in 2003 although they keep stating that a "cap" was used. I wonder how this "cap" method is worked out. What is the definition of the actual "cap" that the oft wanted them to use.

tiggrae

no bespoke and freedom - they would be classed as the sellers, FirstPlus is only the loan provider so they are free to wash their hands of the PPI mis selling.

The only thing going for people is what j-homer said they both have Consumer Credit Licences which means they have to abide by a UK County Court decision - I think I'm going to start proceedings against Bespoke in the County Court on behalf of a client and see where we get [/quote]

tiggrae

sarahc5388 wrote: »

does anybody know how this affets the working out that mcolak did for me -? in fcat mcolak, are you there?

hi Sarah, you could try sending him a personal message, he worked out the figures for you - I can never make head nor tail of someone else's calculation - but in general if you're going for a claim of mis selling - you need to work out what you've paid (in either premiums + any you've been forced to pay on any early settlement) - any rebate.

homer_j_3

tiggrae wrote: »

Look I work for a company making reclaims for people - I've actually got money back for people who have had their claim thrown out by the FOS because the client made a mistake in their complaint -or they made a mistake in trying to start court proceedings - there are A LOT of people out there to whom making a reclaim is a mystery, even after being on this site - I also have won cases in court where again the individual would have had no idea what to do or what to put on their particular of claim - we offer a very valuable service to clients who wouldn't have got a penny back if it hadn't have been for us !!!!!

Do you take money from their claim or add your cost to the claim. If its the latter then fair enough. I have nothing against claims companies wholly.

The fact that the FOS won't agree to pay compensation over and above would indicate that you are paid by deduction out of claim or you set a fixed price for the claim.

When you see people paying 25% of their claims away, it is ridiculous as the goal of the FOS has not worked. People should be put back into the positions that they would have been had the issue not happened. When you are 25% down, you are still not there are you.

As you say, it could be the fact that the complainant has missed the vital arguments and points. It is good that you can help on here but my thoughts to working this way are not going to change.

tiggrae

homer_j wrote: »

Do you take money from their claim or add your cost to the claim. If its the latter then fair enough. I have nothing against claims companies wholly.

The fact that the FOS won't agree to pay compensation over and above would indicate that you are paid by deduction out of claim or you set a fixed price for the claim.

When you see people paying 25% of their claims away, it is ridiculous as the goal of the FOS has not worked. People should be put back into the positions that they would have been had the issue not happened. When you are 25% down, you are still not there are you.

As you say, it could be the fact that the complainant has missed the vital arguments and points. It is good that you can help on here but my thoughts to working this way are not going to change.

and how much would they pay a solicitor - or would you rather have the companies who have done the mis selling in the first place to get away with it - people can lose their claim on a legal technicality or simply can't be bothered to do the work themselves -

marluc

tiggrae wrote: »

no bespoke and freedom - they would be classed as the sellers, FirstPlus is only the loan provider so they are free to wash their hands of the PPI mis selling.


Hi.
I've just checked the defence from FF solicitor's. TThe defendent (FF) arranged for claimant + husband to borrow the sum of £19,140 (loan amount) from IGroup Loans(the loan). It comprised the following: an advance amount of £15000, an amount for optional PPI which was to be provided by Ace Insurance S.A.-N.V and Sterling Life Ltd (the insurance).
I have never heard of thease 2 companies. I only have letters with IGroup (now GE Money) and FF letterheads.
I think I will now look at who these 2 other companies are. Are they allowed to use other companies without informing the "buyer" of the loan?
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
I am still preparing my "statement of Fact" which has to be back by 9th June.

homer_j_3

Bravo for the objection handling skills.

You should not have to use a solicitor for any complaint that the FOS can deal with. That is why it exists. If the client gets the wrong argument, then clearly their success may be limited but you need to know why you are complaining before you complain.

If you want to take it through the courts, then there are companies that do not work by deducting money from what people are due. If you have an issue with things like endowments and pension misselling then there is plenty of help out there that wont cost you a chunk of your cash.

Its not ethical. A claim over 5k in the courts can mean that the claimants costs can often be added to the claim and what happens if there is no physical money back from your success of putting the situation right? IE. the problem is put right but no money comes back to the client. You may have saved them 10k through what you do but still expect 2.5k to be paid by the client. (if the charge was 25% that is).

Its not right at all in my personal opinion.

Ploddy

Ploddy wrote: »

Could someone clarify something for me, and if possible put a link to the legislation which covers it.

Copied from this site on the page regarding PPI reclaiming

If your policy ended over six years ago and you do not have the paperwork: Do not start a reclaim. As lenders only have to keep records for six years, if no one has a record of the contract a reclaim is unlikely to be sucessful.

Letter from bank states

...it is your credit history that remains on file for six years from the closure of your loan agreement... inferring that they do not need to keep the records for this long

I believe I know who is correct, however I would like to be able to point my bank in the direction of where to get their facts right.

I know that my loan ended less that 6 years ago, so this means they should still have copies of the paperwork, am I correct? :question:

Okay, I have taken marshallka's advice and checked the Information Commissioner's website, as well as petermb's advice and looked at the Inland Revenue's website, :beer:

On top of this I have read :eek:
Data Protection Act 1998
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Financial Services and Markets Act 2000
Financial Services Act 1986

believe me, very good for insomnia,

however unless I have missed it, none of these acts stipulate how long banks/financial institutions need to retain there records for.

Whilst I believe that it must state somewhere about the 6 year rule, I having great difficulty finding it, and really need to quote the act and section in my reply to HFC, (who are stating they do not need to keep records this long).

Any help is appreciated.

Ploddy

homer_j_3

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/small_firms/advisers/FAQ/handbook.shtml#record

Record keeping section