Voluntary Termination Of Vehicle Query

[R0b]

So are the finance companies allowed to mark the credit files as voluntary terminated? I thought they should only show the contract as settled?

Yes. The VT mark is accurate and factual and shouldn't adversely affect your credit scoring though it may cause you problems if part of a lender's criteria is to check whether or not you have a VT marker on any credit account. In that case they may decline to offer you credit or could perhaps increase the interest rate as a risk in case you VT the agreement with that lender.

It would be wrong and incorrect if a lender recorded the account as delinquent or something similar.

[Em_r_ald]

Yes. The VT mark is accurate and factual and shouldn't adversely affect your credit scoring though it may cause you problems if part of a lender's criteria is to check whether or not you have a VT marker on any credit account. In that case they may decline to offer you credit or could perhaps increase the interest rate as a risk in case you VT the agreement with that lender.

It would be wrong and incorrect if a lender recorded the account as delinquent or something similar.

Thanks for the post R0b.. didn't know this but is very useful. I'm giving the VT idea a third thought never mind a second!..... It'd be easier to let the contract run its course as given the stories I'm reading on here.

[R0b]

VT is not for everyone and you can exercise that right provided that the final payment does not become due. As an alternative, you could simply hand the car back after the hire period but you should be mindful that if you do exceed the agreed contractual mileage then you have no comeback and will be liable to pay it regardless of any argument because you will be contractually bound by that provision. You would have to argue that the clause is unfair but in light of recent court cases, I think you would find it to be a difficult argument to run.

The same would apply in relation to any damage to the vehicle. Lenders use the BVRLA standard which in my eyes doesn't take account of the age of the vehicle so the same criteria would be applied to a car of any age. Running an argument of unfairness might be more reasonable in this respect but only if the car was second-hand. If you had the car from new then I would think that you would also struggle.

Even if you let things run its course and hand the car back, there;s nothing stopping BMW FS from recording adverse entries on your credit file if you raise any disputes, which may result is less stronger arguments being made had you exercised your VT right.

There are both advantages and disadvantages to both options, you just need to consider what works for you, taking into account that BMW will apply adverse entries to your credit file if you even dispute anything they are claiming. That in my view is unreasonable, unfair and breach of data protection but you will only get a resolution either way if you pursue your dispute through the courts. That way it will force BMW's hand to act and either defend the claim or come to a settlement.

[Em_r_ald]

Thanks R0b, Top advice. The mileage isn't a worry, but I do need to get the wheels scuff sorted if I go down the VT route. It is a car from new so no prior scuffs stratches etc. I just don't fancy that showing on my credit file. I might as well stick it out until the bitter end.... What I have learnt having a car on PCP is that's it's a total bind. I wont be doing PCP again for that reason alone. Funny how the dealers don't tell you that....

[Em_r_ald]

Actually, just a thought.... if I then applied for a normal loan to purchase a car (not PCP or HP) would the VT matter to the lender? (assuming BMW) don't get funny with the VT. Or I may be wise to have other finance in place before I VT.

[bob0411]

Em_r_ald Sorry, not been online in a while and just saw this latest discussion.

Yes, Santander have marked this as a VT on my credit file.

I've just been chasing this up with Experian as, although the VT is listed as September 2018, they're still declaring an outstanding balance of just over £3500 for some reason.

I've also had enough of PCP so now have a Peugeot on personal hire which works out a lot cheaper anyway (if you avoid the dealerships and find a reputable leasing firm online).

R0b Finally got a call from the Financial Ombudsman, they've allocated a case worker who is looking at my complaint, hopefully a decision is now imminent.

Santander did not reply to the subject access request and it's now been 77 days so I'm going to raise a complaint about this to the ICO.

Further updates to follow as I get them.

[R0b]

Hello

Yes, I would make a complaint to the ICO about that. It's rather shocking that Santander have deliberately (or what appears to be) ignored your request. Are you sure you sent the request to the right address? If you did, then even though you can complain to the ICO you are also entitled to make an application to the court for an order that Santander complies. It does come at a cost of £255 and you would get your fees back but I think in the first instance you need to send a letter before action, that might kickstart them into complying as well as complaining to the ICO.

Depends on how urgent you need the information.

[bob0411]

R0b Just had an update from the Financial Ombudsman, they've now received all the paperwork they requested from Santander and will be in touch once they've reviewed everything. I asked if they'd been provided with a copy of the call recording from 28/09/18 and they hadn't but have also requested it themselves so I guess I can finally get a copy via that route. I've also complained about the outstanding £3591 shown on my credit file, on the grounds it's adversely affecting my credit score, no idea what this is!

[bob0411]

R0b Partial victory today! After notifying Santander that I'd raised a complaint to the ICO I received a call from them today, apologising for not replying to the SAR. They stated this was down to 'human error' on their part and that the information would be sent to me by the end of the week. They also offered me £100 compensation for failing to reply to the SAR in a timely manner. I'll be interested to see what they actually send me, as, if it's coming through the post it doesn't sound like an audio copy of the recorded conversations between myself and the Santander call centre agents that I'd requested? (If it's merely a written transcript that won't prove anything.)

[bob0411]

R0b The data I requested via the SAR arrived today, both a written copy of the agents notes and a cd containing a copy of the call recordings. However the key conversation from 28/09/18 was missing! Rang to challenge this and was told it was 'accidentally' missed and would be sent recorded delivery tomorrow, hmm let's see!

[bob0411]

R0b Further good progress today. Firstly, I received confirmation from Experian that my credit file has finally now been corrected and the Hyundai account is now showing as settled with a closure date of October. Secondly, I also received the missing call recording from 28/09/18 from Santander. Having listened to the call it confirms my original assertion that the agent claimed Santander had authority from the FCA to levy the £70 collection fee. And that after I challenged this and asked for written proof of this the agent then stated she would send me written evidence of this in the form of an ad hoc letter that would be e-mailed to me. What I was actually sent was simply a copy of my contract. I've passed all of this on to the Financial Ombudsman.

[R0b]

That is some good news, though I have to wonder if this is partly down to you raising a complaint to the FOS. Nonetheless, I think you should ask the Ombudsman to make a compensatory award on the basis of their aggravated behaviour by refusing after repeated requests to correctly update your credit file but then only doing so once you have submitted a complaint to the FOS.

It has had an affect on you and I am sure you were worried about obtaining further credit whilst the adverse marker(s) remained on your credit file. As further evidence to support a monetary award, you could provide a copy of the Halliday v Consumer Creation Finance Ltd where the Court of Appeal awarded £750 against Creation where they mistakenly applied a default marker but subsequently removed it. Arguably, Santander's behaviour is not the same as they have deliberately refused to remove the adverse marker(s) but don't expect anything, more of a bonus.

Link to Halliday case

[bob0411]

rob, thanks for the additional guidance.

I'm still waiting for the FOS decision but have already asked if he can consider compensation over the adverse marker. I will supply him with this additional info, thank you.

The £100 compensation for the failed SAR hasn't materialised, apparently the Santander finance department messed the payment up (twice) so it's now up to £150 and counting. Quite symbolic really!

I also received a call from my old Hyundai dealership this week, they'd had a bizarre call from someone in Santander asking about me and my car being re-possessed!?

I've also reported this to the Ombusdman as a possible breach of data protection.

Further updates to follow...

[bob0411]

R0b I finally received the decision from the Ombudsman and disappointingly he has stated Santander were not being unreasonable in levying the collection fee and has found in their favour. He has not taken note of the legal precedent you provided (Calahane Vs Mercedes Financial Services UK Ltd) nor has he commented on the fact the CCA itself states 'conflicting contractual terms are void and not enforceable'.

He has also not made any judgement on the fact Santander made spurious claims about having 'permission' from the FCA then lying about saying this at all - for which I have actual audio recordings proving this.

I've appealed this decision and requested a review but I may have to go down the legal route as well - was it the small claims court you used in your case?

I also received the compensation payment from Santander for their missing the SAR deadline, had to chase them for this and they upped it to £150 by way of apology!

As regards the extended delay in correcting my credit file and Santander also contacting my dealership with false information the ombudsman has stated I will need to raise a separate formal complaint on these matters - so I can expect another 4 months for them to process that!

Ombudsman's full response below:


I’ve now looked at all the information that you and the business have given me.

Based on what I’ve seen, I think the Hyundai Finance has dealt with your complaint fairly – so I’m not

asking them to do any more.

You said an agent told you Hyundai Finance had written permission from the financial

authority to levy this collection fee over and above the 50%. You then said Hyundai

Finance are now saying an agent didn’t say this and that she was referring to the CCA.

I’ve listened to the telephone call you had with the agent. You were told that Hyundai

Finance wouldn’t have been able to offer a contract to yourself had the Financial Conduct

Authority (FCA) and the CCA not complied with it. Which I don’t find to be unreasonable.

Furthermore, as you agreed to the terms and conditions of the contract, I’m unable to

agree that Hyundai Finance has made an error or acted unreasonably in charging the £70

collection fee. I say this because this fee isn’t part of the credit.

I appreciate you said this fee isn’t in the CCA, however this doesn’t mean Hyundai Finance

has made an error or contradicted the CCA is charging you for this. This is a collection fee

which is charged should a customer not return the car to the relevant auction site.

As you agreed to the terms and conditions of the agreement, I’m unable to fairly conclude

that Hyundai Finance should waive this fee, or that it has acted unreasonably in charging

for it.

[R0b]

Is this the investigator's decision or an Ombudsman? By appeal I am assuming it is the investigator.

Not surprising to be honest and I think if the investigator has not taken into account your evidence then you should raise all of that when it comes to the Ombudsman. You could also clarify why the investigator has said that he has taken all information into account but failed to explain why the county court case and other evidence you supplied wasnt acceptable.

If you were to take your chances in court with Santander I think youd have a decent chance. Take a look at the link below, Santander tried it on with me, issued a claim and settled within two weeks. It may not be the same with you but I dount they'd take their chances in court.

https://legalbeagles.info/forums/for...e-of-your-case