• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Car finance - the next PPI scandal..."

Collapse

  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by BolshieBastard View Post
    Absolute bollocks decision by the court. Would be baffling if the SC doesnt overturn it. Who knew salesmen and women, in any form of selling, got commission?

    It's like this diesel nonesense of people suing because their car gave a lower emission reading 'on test' so they ended paying less VED in the UK than if the car had given a higher co2 reading 'off' test.

    [Rhetorical question]Are any of these owners paying the additional VED they should have?[/Rhetorical question] N, but they think they're 'entitled' to compo all the same!
    It's just a variation of Wood v Commercial First Business Ltd and Othersfrom 2021...

    Leave a comment:


  • BolshieBastard
    replied
    Absolute bollocks decision by the court. Would be baffling if the SC doesnt overturn it. Who knew salesmen and women, in any form of selling, got commission?

    It's like this diesel nonesense of people suing because their car gave a lower emission reading 'on test' so they ended paying less VED in the UK than if the car had given a higher co2 reading 'off' test.

    [Rhetorical question]Are any of these owners paying the additional VED they should have?[/Rhetorical question] N, but they think they're 'entitled' to compo all the same!

    Leave a comment:


  • Chris Bryce
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post

    I can hear all the PPI claim firms pulling the dust covers off the desks and firing up the autodiallers already.
    My Twitter feed is already thoroughly polluted by such.

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    Originally posted by WTFH View Post
    I can hear all the PPI claim firms pulling the dust covers off the desks and firing up the autodiallers already.

    Leave a comment:


  • WTFH
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
    This one appears to be about commissions being hidden but not sure if that means there is a basis for a claim by the customer. Can they claim the amount of commission back from someone as it wasn't legally applied?
    It appears so:
    https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/re...m-car-finance/

    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post


    Is this another biggie that's gonna run for years?
    Yes

    Edit to add - basically all interest charge will need to be repaid...

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    started a topic Car finance - the next PPI scandal...

    Car finance - the next PPI scandal...

    The car finance market is in chaos after a shock court ruling left banks and lenders scrambling to save it from collapse.

    Lloyds Banking Group has now scrapped their commission payments to dealers, after a Court of Appeal judgement ruled car salesmen must inform their customers about bonuses, commissions and fees they get from lenders.
    It comes after three complainants won their Court of Appeal battle, saying they were mis-sold motor finance. They ruled that 'a broker could not lawfully receive a commission from a lender without obtaining the customer's fully informed consent to the payment', CityAM reports.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...mmissions.html

    PPI was about policies sold to them they couldn't claim on so paying for nothing so a fairly clear case of getting your money back. This one appears to be about commissions being hidden but not sure if that means there is a basis for a claim by the customer. Can they claim the amount of commission back from someone as it wasn't legally applied?

    Is this another biggie that's gonna run for years?

Working...
X