Direct Auto Finance - Hounding Me! And Knocked On My Door On A Sunday!

rosemahairy

homer_j wrote: »

The post is a lot more recent than 2006 but you have probably looked at the date I joined this forum.

The post you have read explains what makes a loan voidable. It is normally the non disclosure of commission. So to put this into perspective for you.

Yes Car Credit will set the loan up with Direct Auto Finance. There will be a commission no doubt payable to Yes for introducing this business.

They then add on PPI/GAP ETC. This will be done through another company who specialise in this. There will be commission involved for flogging that too.

If you cannot spot in your agreement that there has been these commissions paid or in any paperwork, then your loan is voidable under the law of agency which states that you have to disclose commission otherwise you are committing a form of bribery.

If the credit agreement is regulated under the consumer credit act 1974, then your agreement has to meet some requirements of the contents of this agreement and if it does not, then it becomes unenforceable.

So your agreement could be one, or both of these. It is pretty simple to spot but very difficult and costly to get the lender to concede as they will just put barriers in your way. If you try and claim over 5k which many claims will, the small claims court rules change I believe so it is always wise to ensure your argument is right.

Thanks for that. I have looked at my credit/HP agreement and find that there is no where at all on this agreement stating commision is being paid to anyone for sale of the vehicle or the insurances. However, i have been through all the stuff sent in the SAR reuest and there are mentions of commission being paid for sales of the insurances. Does this mean i can put this further arguement forward to the ombudsman to get it voided (addedt o the long list of other mistakes they made lol)?

homer_j_3

That may well protect them if they have partially disclosed from making the loan voidable.

Wilson & Another v Hurstanger ltd is the case that tells you what happens here. The £240 commission that was paid but not fully disclosed by amount was ordered to be repaid with interest on top.

It would be worth getting someone to look at the agreements and full case as there could be other issues that you have not spotted that may well exist.

This is a perfect example of why doing this alone may not be the best approach due to the complexity of things that can make a simple argument not become so simple.

rosemahairy

It shocking that the Joe Public like me have to resort to getting legal. The agreements should be right from the start. Il have a look on that website and at the case see if i can get any pointers. Citizens advice have looked at my agreements and found many faults which have been put in the complaint to the FOS but commission element and the fact the whole agreement may be voidable was not spotted. If you fail with the FOS initially i should be able to raise this then when i appeal?

homer_j_3

The FOS are not solicitors and do not know common law. They are people who have experts that understand FSA law and regulations. The only way you will get the loan voided or made unenforceable is by going to court or hoping that the lender agrees with you before this point.

In one respect, you are right that its shocking that you have to resort to this and it is shocking that lenders cannot get the agreement right to start with.

What isnt shocking though is that people are still in the mindset that lenders are above the law and that they lend this money in good faith that you will pay it back and overlook the fact that millions - thats right MILLIONS of agreements out there are not legal and they bank has broken the law each time.

You tell me anybody else that can get away with repeated offences like that.

rosemahairy

homer_j wrote: »

The FOS are not solicitors and do not know common law. They are people who have experts that understand FSA law and regulations. The only way you will get the loan voided or made unenforceable is by going to court or hoping that the lender agrees with you before this point.

In one respect, you are right that its shocking that you have to resort to this and it is shocking that lenders cannot get the agreement right to start with.

What isnt shocking though is that people are still in the mindset that lenders are above the law and that they lend this money in good faith that you will pay it back and overlook the fact that millions - thats right MILLIONS of agreements out there are not legal and they bank has broken the law each time.

You tell me anybody else that can get away with repeated offences like that.

lol if only. As i keep saying at least !!!!!! Turpin wore a mask

Ms-Pacman

Well I have got proof that commission was paid. Essentually I am giving DAF the option to pay a reasonable amount of the PPI back. Unfortunatly proving I was forced to take it is not easy. In fact the soliciatos who were recommended to contact seem to suggest the best option would be to just get the amount being chased for written off. I don't agree with this though and basically want what I have unfairly paid back and don't agree I owe anything anyway!!!

I am waiting for DAFs response which has been sent to DLC's director as he requested this to be forwarded to DAF so my request is being taken seriously. I have also made it clear that I have every intention of taking it to the small claism court for the PPI if I do not get a result on this.

The next stage will depend o the result of the above two paragraphs

DAF have NEVER been taken to actual court without it being a agreed settlement out of court prior to it going ahead. At the end of the day I have nothing to lose. The debt is so old it will only be a few more years till statute barred anyway. Unfortunately I just miss qualifying for legal aid as otherwise I would be going full steam ahead right now rather than doing in stages.

In regards to the unsigned agreement, when the car was taken out, Yes Car Credit would provide 2 copies of the contract (as mine was a joint finance there were 3). The customer would sign each one, YCC would allow you to take one copy not signed by YCC as it would be Direct Auto Finance who were the financers (and ultimately own YCC) who would sign the agreement. As this could not be done on the day this would then sent to DAF to be signed and a copy would be sent to you which show your signature and theirs. The dates differ by a few days. If you send a CCA request to DAF they will send you a copy which is the one both you and they signed. It is a real copy as well. I have seen this not just in mine, but mentioned in many threads on DAF and YCC.

homer_j_3

Who have you sought legal aid from? It really doesnt exisit these days for these types of claims, however, someone has said some firms will undertake it if they feel the case is large and strong enough.


All these DAF and DLC are confusing me lol - but I think I follow you. My question still remains, why not make the loan unenfirceable if this has been proven?

rosemahairy

http://www.stephensons.co.uk/site/home/

These solicitors keep coming up as being good in representing against YES CAR credit. I will be using them if the FOS find against me. Their website says you get half hour free session and if you have strong case they will take it on no win no fee.

Ms-Pacman

I'm was using stephensons but I want to take DAF to court to claim for the PPI overcharged. If this is successful then the balance of the car at the voluntary surrender would have been in credit not owing so I will then put a claim in for either the car back or the full amount paid.
Stephensons do not recommend this or agree with me and seem reluctant to rock the boat with DAF in any system different to what they have already in place or dealt with. (I could be wrong but this is the impression I have been given and I am starting to distrust them as well. I am being pushed by them to do something I am not happy to do and as a result have gone to a local solicitor in my area.)

I disagree with Stephensons and so does my new solicitor (who knows I am going the small claims court alone and has merely given advice how to deal with this with checking details I have, correcting any flaws in my arguement info and providing strong arguements / information to my benefit