BMW Financial Services - Voluntary Termination/Excess Mileage

[R0b]

Hi Kurt,

I have nothing further to add - last resort is to take it to court.

[Cmilligan]

Hi folks

A quick update on my situation. I paid a discounted amount in June 2018 with a view that this would be removed from my credit file and it updated accordingly. Please be very cautious if you do this as it is still showing on my credit file with a zero balance however all the missed payments remain, I have been in contact with BMWF who now tell me they can not do anything about my credit file!!!!!

[planty123]

Just a quick update from my side, as the originator of this thread...

I decided to make BMW FS a without prejudice, "full & final settlement" offer following their offering me a 50% reduction the last time I spoke to them on the phone. I wrote them a very clear letter explaining that I would agree to pay 50%, but only if the following terms were met:

• Neither BMW Financial Services (GB) Limited nor any associate company (including Debt Collection Agencies) will take any further action to attempt to enforce or pursue the alleged balance owing in any way whatsoever and that I will no longer accused of any liability
• BMW Financial Services (GB) Limited will report to all credit reference agencies (Experian, Equifax, CallCredit etc.) to ensure that they update their records to display the account as closed via way of full and final settlement with a balance of £0.00 owing
• BMW Financial Services (GB) Limited will report to all credit reference agencies (Experian, Equifax, CallCredit etc.) to ensure that they correct their records to remove all previously reported missed/late payment entries and amend the account history to show Account Status “0” (Payment up to date) for every month since the account opening, including the months following the date of Voluntary Termination

They came back to me fairly promptly, via email, saying that they would not accept my terms. They explained that, they would accept a payment of 50% of the total alleged balance, but only as a "partial settlement". They said that upon receipt of this sum, they would update credit reference agencies to show the account as partially settled with a balance of £0.00, but they would not remove any prior negatives (missed/late payment entries). They've decided to play hard ball as well, giving me just a few days to make a decision. They had the audacity to refer to their acceptance of a 50% payment as a "goodwill gesture" on their part. Disgraceful.

The only reason I even considered paying 50% of the alleged balance was to ensure that BMW FS corrected the false information that they have submitted to credit reference agencies. If they're refusing to do that, then where's my incentive to pay? Either way, I need to take them to court to get the incorrect information removed.

If you have any advice at all R0b, it'd be much appreciated.

Hi Kurt,

I am about to end my BMW agreement via VT and I have sat tonight and read through all the posts.

I see you have not posted since July and I am curious as to whether you decided to settle the account or take ti to court? If you settled, what terms were agreed IE removing the late markers and whether it was marked as full settlement or partial.

To be honest, I'm going to have to pay £1500, I might chance my arm to get a reduction however reading these threads, I don't consider all the effort you've gone through to be worth it for me personally but I completely support your argument.

I look forward to hearing from you,

Kind Regards,

David

[Cmilligan]

Hi David

i would recommend paying the mileage charge as it’s had such an impact on my life having been refused credit for s mortgage etc. They unfortunately have us over a barrel and I can’t see anything changing any time soon!!

Thanks

chris

[Amethyst]

KurtCrisco - have you taken this any further ?

[pt2537]

Hi David

i would recommend paying the mileage charge as it’s had such an impact on my life having been refused credit for s mortgage etc. They unfortunately have us over a barrel and I can’t see anything changing any time soon!!

Thanks

chris

The excess mileage charges may well be unenforceable, and if that is the case, then the default placed on your credit file may be open to challenge using the Grace v Blackhorse ruling, just my initial views

[Cmilligan]

Hi folks a quick update from my end, I complained to BMWF regarding my credit file and received the following reply...

Thank you for remaining patient whilst we have investigated your complaint.

On reviewing your account I can see that we did amend it with Equifax, Experian and Call credit on 8 June 2018 following the full and final payment received on the 29 May 2018.

I have checked your credit file and can see that it is not reporting correctly, so I have manually amended it to remove all the late payment markers and show a zero balance with a “P” flag to reflect your agreed partial settlement. This update may take up to 5 days to reflect on your credit file.

I can only apologise for our previous amendments not updating, and have raised this issue direct with the credit reference agencies.

Should you have any further reason to contact us about your credit file please contact the Recovery Department direct.

Please note that, under the terms of our Complaints Procedure, this is our final response. If you are dissatisfied with it, you have the right to refer your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service, free of charge – but you must do so within six months of the date of this letter.

If you do not refer your complaint in time, the Ombudsman will not have our permission to consider your complaint and so will only be able to do so in very limited circumstances. For example, if the Ombudsman believes that the delay was as a result of exceptional circumstances.

[R0b]

Hello

Thanks for the update.

I presume based on that email you offered to pay the amount in return for removing the adverse entries? Did you get that in writing or was it done verbally? Some BMW users have had issues when they've paid on the premise that the entries will be removed only for BMW to backtrack on their word.

[Cmilligan]

Hi Rob

Unfortunately it was all done verbally. I had asked when I complained that the calls be listened to as I was offered a reduced payment to pay on the day, no mention of a part payment. I was also told my credit file would be amended a accordingly.

Chris

[Kajan81]

Re: BMW Financial Services - Voluntary Termination/Excess Mileage

If it is causing some distress then there is always the option to send a 'without prejudice' letter (which means a court has no right to see the letter and is private between you and BMW) to offer some form of lower settlement (perhaps start at 30%) on the condition that any settlement is (1) made without admission of liability and (2) that BMW undertake to remove all adverse entries reported to credit reference agencies and mark the account as 'settled'.

Or you could continue to stand your ground and see what the ICO comes up with and decide from there.

KURTCRISCO


How did you get on with your case in relation to BMW finance? I ask because I am in exactly same situation.

Thanks.

[scotstoun]

I came across this post last night, spent the best part of an hour which I'll never get back reading it, and can't believe some of the falsehoods and victim-mentality I'm seeing!

Stuckcluckets - You've read an urban myth on the internet about being able to dodge excess mileage charges on a PCP voluntary early termination and are one of a tiny minority of customers who have bought into it. I don't blame you... people believe what they want to believe, however it seems to have become an obsession. You're reading FAR too much into the whole situation and are taking advice from people like Rob which is completely off-the-mark. The reality of the situation is very simple... you have a finance agreement which includes an additional element (within the one agreement) for dealing with excess mileage. You exceed it, you pay. CAP, Glasses, and even the Parkers Guide details the value attached for every 1,000 mile variation for a given age of car. It really is that simple, as I suspect you've finally realised despite your various postings throughout the 12 pages of this thread. BMW Finance have been perfectly reasonable with you despite your increasingly erratic posts about them on this site. The only reason they haven't taken you to court is that court action is a last resort and in the cost-benefit analysis, it is better for them to gently coerce you to pay by recording your non-payment with the credit reference agencies. I would also say that the ICO have been far more reasonable than most organisations could ever be expected to be. They are there to deal with the 'information' aspect, not to be your personal champion against BMW Finance. Seems you need to grow up and lose the entitled self-righteousness approach. Your posts do nothing to help people visiting this site to seek advice on genuine issues.

Rob - It's obvious from your posts on this topic that you are neither legally qualified, nor even part-qualified, and are in no position to be offering advice to people like Stuckcluckets or anyone else seeking advice on similar matters. Later on in your posts you advise him that legal action is the only route left, but I don't see you offering to support him with your own finances (on a no-win no-fee basis perhaps). There is of course a very good reason why you're not prepared to 'put your money where your mouth is' and most of the 'advice' you've given will only lead visitors to threads such as this into financial difficulties, negatively affecting their credit-scores, and result in them being pursued by debt collection agencies - possibly resulting in court action, wage arrestments, difficulties in being able to secure finance in the future etc.

Dehaw - I used to work chasing down people who didn't want to be found, in order to get payment from them. If any of the following apply to you: you are registered as an Australian citizen, are registered to vote, have a bank account or credit-card, own or rent a house in your own name, are a tenant who has placed a deposit, have a job, a mobile phone, a land-line, broad-band connection, utilities account (to name just a few of the ways) then any respectable debt-collection agency can track your current address down within a morning if they are so inclined. Depending on the sum involved, the debt could simply be passed to a debt management company who may choose to pursue you in Australia. Unless we're talking thousands, it is unlikely that they will pursue you in Australia, however I have previously pursued a debtor who fled to Australia. I won't bore you with the process, but it resulted in an arrestment of wages, upon which the debtor promptly paid-up (with costs on top). The easiest thing to do would be to pay the excess mileage charge, but if you decide not to, then that is your decision. Just be aware that you may well find it lurks in the background waiting to bite you in the backside at some inconvenient moment in the future. The excess mileage charges were clearly spelt out to you in the original contract. It's breath-taking arrogance and dishonesty on your part that you think you can just walk away from them. BMW Financial Services are in the right, you are very much in the wrong.

[Amethyst]

For reference - from a transcript of a judgment handed down Feb 2018. This was MBFS rather than BMW

[R0b]

It's quite clear that you've come at this from a contractual perspective and have no clue about the provisions of the Consumer Credit Act, or like many finance companies, have glossed over the appropriate provisions - are you sure you aren't from BMW You are free to disagree but as per the extract provided by Amethyst, the Court seems to think otherwise.

[scotstoun]

^^ One case, which I've heard of, but am not familiar with the exact issues particular to it which caused MBFS to fail in their claim. You guys can present what you like, but these non-payment cases are dealt with by vehicle financing companies on a daily basis and are 99.99% successful. Outstanding claims are routinely 'batched-up' and passed to legal for further action. It's at that point that belligerent 'taking on the big corporate machine' contributors on forums such as this simply 'disappear' so as to not lose face.
Simple fact is that you are encouraging naïve people to avoid paying what they have contractually agreed to pay, thus resulting in further problems for them, whilst you 'internet lawyers' happily bash out more poor and incorrect 'advice' to other gullible punters, safe in the knowledge that you personally face no reputational or financial risk.

[R0b]

You guys can present what you like, but these non-payment cases are dealt with by vehicle financing companies on a daily basis and are 99.99% successful.

And I assume you can share with us that fact? These agreements are regulated by and subject to the CCA, the terms of the HP agreement do not overrule statute law - that is a simple fact.

We give up our time to assist those who cannot afford to pay for legal advice but it is ultimately their decision as to whether they want to take on board what we suggest or not.

On another note, if these contractual charges are routinely dealt with by their legal team on a daily basis and are 99.99% successful, why is it that we are not seeing legal proceedings issued by the many who post on here? To give you a prime example from experience, Santander thought they could get away with trying to record a default on my credit file for collection charges, a term in the contract which according to you would be enforceable like excess mileage charges. I issued a claim and they ended up settling the case in a much worse position (see the settlement below), but according to you, they should have been successful and if that's the case, why did they choose to settle the matter?

You have said multiple times that what is suggested on here is 'incorrect advice' but at the moment you haven't provided a shred of evidence to back that up. MBFS were threatening legal proceedings to debtors left, right and centre prior to that court case Amethyst referred to but since that decision, they seem to have gone rather silent. So I repeat what I said before, if this is so clear cut, why are we not seeing more and more finance companies issuing claims?

Rather than spouting out drivel, why not provide a reasoned explanation as to why the contractual terms prevail over the CCA and back it up with evidence, I'm happy to hear it.