Firstplus Requirements – OFT FOI Release

[Legal Beagles]

On 7 December 2010 the OFT exercised their powers by issuing a notice addressed to Firstplus Financial Group PLC (“Firstplus”) requiring it to (a) follow its existing policies and procedures to ensure compliance with relevant legislation and official guidance, and (b) not to change those policies and procedures for a period of three years without prior notification to the Public Authority. This notice of requirements was issued at the end of an investigation into the operation by Firstplus of an interest variation provision included in its standard contract for second charge loans. However, the notice did not contain any indication of the facts uncovered during the investigation or the reasons for deciding that a notice of requirements was justified and appropriate.

Ray Watson is the former head of Credit Regulation at the OFT, then Director, - now with DEMSA

Nigel Cates is former head of Consumer Credit Enforcement at the OFT, then Deputy Director at the OFT (as he was when these emails were written). He moved to the Financial Ombudsman to become Senior Ombudsman, and now is Head of Service Recovery Policy at HSBC.

David Blocksidge was Head of Debt Management Team at the OFT and is now Manager, Credit Authorisations, Financial Conduct Authority.

Go to top
Go to top
Go to top

Go to top

Read more at: http://legalbeagles.info/firstplus-r...#ixzz3X5AGmqpz

Read more at: http://legalbeagles.info/firstplus-r...#ixzz3X5gNwDWR

Read more at: http://legalbeagles.info/firstplus-r...#ixzz3X5gNwDWR

SOme background - http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/c...base-rate.html



Full documents including requirements draft and letters to Barclays/FirstPlus * Firstplus Financial Group Plc a wholly owned subsidiary of Barclays Bank PLC. Firstplus Financial Group Plc is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (Financial Services Register number: 309325). Registered in England. Registered No. 3315543. Registered office: 1 Churchill Place, London... Read more »
Read More -> Firstplus Requirements – OFT FOI Release


More...

[Fred]

Re: Firstplus Requirements – OFT FOI Release

If any had doubts over regulation before then please let us know what you think after reading the above.:lb:

[Halifax71]

Re: Firstplus Requirements – OFT FOI Release

I've been asking the oft, the phso, the CMA and the phso again, what the reasons were for the reprimand. All have so far refused citing public interest, necessity, and the potential to harm firstplus.
This collusion, I.e just propose this to us and we'll ensure it doesn't go public, and their incompetence, I.e no material harm, are an absolute disgrace.
Material harm?? I've asked the above bodies why my loan liability had increased by £8,000. There has to be legitimate increases in costs in order for the lender to do this under the utccr. Guess what, public interest, necessity and potential harm.
This is a huge issue, they have all colluded, lied and treated this markets customers with complete disdain.
Formal responses to ongoing complaints are due soon but unless those supposedly charged with safeguarding consumers actually start doing their jobs then they will deserve the criticisms that will ultimately come their way.

[Fred]

Re: Firstplus Requirements – OFT FOI Release

I have to agree on the relationship issues put forward & the contentious issues in retrospect, there will no doubt be a backlash as a minimum.

There is no doubt for me that there is a serious problem here & it is/has been covered up by regulatory support in a way not in line with their objectivity.

A business would take advantage of this scenario either way.

[jeremyadavies]

Re: Firstplus Requirements – OFT FOI Release

Hello Halifax 71 I have read several of your posts. MY parents too out a loan with these Sharks 8 or 9 years ago for about 100K, they have paid over 80k back in those years and are trying to sell, the settlement figure is £112k, madness, we expected about £102k ( even that is ridiculous) but were gobsmacked by this figure with no attempt to explain why, do you know of any solicitors we could speak to about taking on the case? You seem quite clued up on these thieves, any suggestions?

- - - Updated - - -

ALso could you send me a reply to jeremyadavies@btinternet.com I will get it quicker, thanks in advance!

[Halifax71]

Re: Firstplus Requirements – OFT FOI Release

Hi Jeremy - first of all you need to understand that over the course of a loan there is a shift in the split between interest and capital repayment, hence even after 8 to 9 years of a 25 year loan the capital might not have reduced too much. I've not gone into this much as I don't think there is anything specifically unfair in early settlement calculation assuming they're still not using the old rule of 78. http://moneyfacts.co.uk/guides/loans/rule-78-guides/

If you're happy with that concept, and if not I can provide an example later, then it is not acceptable in my opinion for them to still owe more than the original loan. I wouldn't bother with a lawyer, this place will do just fine.

If you haven't asked already you need to ask for a full breakdown of the settlement, for example it needs to be understood what methodology they are using to calculate the early repayment charge.

Once we have that we can advise further.

[Fred]

Re: Firstplus Requirements – OFT FOI Release

Some older BBC stuff;

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programme...ox/8146083.stm :tinysmile_twink_t2:

[Fred]

Re: Firstplus Requirements – OFT FOI Release

After all the hard work, there still seems to be little interest in the disclosure, almost like this sort of thing is normal.

What a pitiful shame it is still ignored along with consumer rights.

[Fred]

Re: Firstplus Requirements – OFT FOI Release

Second charge (unregulated especially) contracts are allegedly "unfair" in that the providers do pretty much as they please along with the additional protection of the FOS in their incapacitated role on this subject.

Consumers suffering with one of these contracts face, unlimited charges,unlimited interest rates & little by way of any sympathetic consideration/s. Certainly it is of some members views that a "more fool you for signing" takes precedence.

There is no "balance" here just dictation for consumers trapped with no escape.

[Fred]

Re: Firstplus Requirements – OFT FOI Release

The PHSO makes an interesting comment on the reprimand investigation into the activities of the OFT in that Firstplus were given the opportunity to amend their RCAPPM (rate change & policy procedures manual) prior to any decision on the reprimand. Suggesting that the action would prevent the matter resulting in anything more than a slap on the wrist for Firstplus.

It must also be noted that interest rates were at their highest when the limited details on the reprimand were made public. Indicating any matters would remain as they stood at the time & the future as it stands now was not considered.

Also the legal advise the OFT had enquired/instigated over the issues faced regarding the terms, has, mysteriously disappeared.

[Fred]

Re: Firstplus Requirements – OFT FOI Release

This has got to be one of the worst & most bias examples of regulation I have ever read.

Not only is it obvious the regulator (the OFT) at the time was sympathetic to the business but, all the systems & procedures put in place by sister authorities backed all of the non-disclosure including & embarrassingly so the, PHSO had to wait for a legal judgement in order to adjudicate in stereo typical supportive fashion.

How bent is our regulatory system ?

[meellis]

Re: Firstplus Requirements – OFT FOI Release

I am unsure if bent is correct but it is only there to appease those who say that things should be regulated. Place a regulator there and you have passed the buck of bad or non regulation to somebody else, then before a regulator can find there teeth change the rules or body and start everything again. It is bad that there are so many things so wrong with the OFT's investigation/reprimand but with them gone and the FCA in there place it is the long slog to get them to take things like their responsibilities and duties seriously before even getting them to consider any investigation. All the while the consumer suffers but if that is in the shadows then it is ok for them to drag their heels.

[Fred]

Re: Firstplus Requirements – OFT FOI Release

"Bent" as in the above is, in my opinion, a very good & concise description.

How peculiar that the loan providers (protected) continued to increase their profits even in the face of the PPI that they are, still, to this day disputing.

They continued & are continuing to re-possess homes, attempt to re-possess homes, enforce charges that would never be allowed on any first charge mortgages.

I have it in writing that the FCA were making matters better with the MMR & subsequently the implication of the MCD then, earlier this year they (the FCA) state that secured loans over £25K (signed prior to April 2008) will not come under any mortgage regulatory control. This was following an investigation by the Complaints Commissioner who knew full well, these loans, were not regulated at the time of the complaint, yet, used the ongoing implementation to fob off consumer/s.

[Fred]

Re: Firstplus Requirements – OFT FOI Release

No matter how many times I read this, it still comes out along with the PHSO report, that, the regulator gave an opportunity to the licensee to amend its policies in order to mitigate any regulatory reaction/s.

This information took a hell of lot of effort to obtain & is, in my view, a shameful contradictory window into our regulatory system & its flaws.

We need to see the full story on this.

[royfoot]

Re: Firstplus Requirements – OFT FOI Release

firstplus financial, first owned by texas firm taken over by the mafia,when found guilty sold to barclays bank plc
see http://www.bigtrial.net/2014/07/verd...eXogQviPQbK.99