Voluntary Termination of HP Agreement with GMAC

[DrAJ]

Hi,

Been reading through a lot of good information on this site and wanted to introduce myself. My wife has recently ended a car HP agreement through the VT process. The finance company (GMAC) are now claiming an inflated amount for damages -which we are disputing. Some similarities to other cases but there are a couple of things I want mention specifically.

Firstly my wife signed digitally for collection of the vehicle only. She made this clear. Also that she was not signing the report and not agreeing to the price. However her digital signature appears on the report (which I think is a bit naughty - although it does say ''disagree with price"). The report is also inaccurate - they are charging for missing service history / documents. We acquired the vehicle second hand with a partial service history. The handbook was in the vehicle when it was returned; although they said it was missing. And they didn't collect the receipts and other service related documents that were offered with the vehicle. The Manheim vehicle inspector did not leave contact details.

I've made a verbal complaint to the effect that I didn't think the inspector was very professional and that obviously they would understand that we would be unable to agree the report as it was factually inaccurate. (That's apart from the ridiculous price for trivial repairs out of proportion to the value of the vehicle.)

I have kept photos and copies of all the documents. I am in the process of reminding them about S173 of the CCA and telling them what they can do with their invoice! Any thoughts?

[R0b]

Re: Voluntary Termination of HP Agreement with GMAC

Good morning, as I'm sure you have read, GMAC seem to be a bit of a pain and can be quite awkward.

If your wife made it clear that she would only sign that the car had been collected and she was given that impression by the collection agent then that is clearly a misrepresentation and possibly fraudulent too.

Although you've made a verbal complaint I would suggest you put it in writing so you keep a paper trail as it's always easier to prove than something over the phone, unless the call was recorded by you or GMAC, and GMAC certainly won't make it easy for you to obtain that recording.

The onus is on GMAC to prove that the car has sustained damage beyond a reasonable condition whilst it was in your possession. Partial service history does not alone mean the car is in an unreasonable condition and if the car had partial service history when you turned took possession then again GMAC should provide evidence to disprove this (which they can't).

GMAC have 8 weeks to come to their final decision on your complaint so you need to make sure you get everything in the complaint and I would assume that based on previous complaints they may deduct an amount as a gesture of good will. If you aren't happy with that then you can proceed to the Financial Ombudsman. Unfortunately they seem to disregard any legal interpretation of the Consumer Credit Act so a difference argument may need to be put forward such as the termination statement in your agreement that says as long as you have paid 50% and took reasonable car of the goods then you owe nothing more.

One other thing to look out for is that they may apply a default on your wife's credit file. I won't go in to detail but I did explain why they can't do this inanother thread although it relates to excess mileage the reasons why still apply -> http://legalbeagles.info/forums/show...960&highlight=

[mally h]

Re: Voluntary Termination of HP Agreement with GMAC

Good morning, as I'm sure you have read, GMAC seem to be a bit of a pain and can be quite awkward.

If your wife made it clear that she would only sign that the car had been collected and she was given that impression by the collection agent then that is clearly a misrepresentation and possibly fraudulent too.

Although you've made a verbal complaint I would suggest you put it in writing so you keep a paper trail as it's always easier to prove than something over the phone, unless the call was recorded by you or GMAC, and GMAC certainly won't make it easy for you to obtain that recording.

The onus is on GMAC to prove that the car has sustained damage beyond a reasonable condition whilst it was in your possession. Partial service history does not alone mean the car is in an unreasonable condition and if the car had partial service history when you turned took possession then again GMAC should provide evidence to disprove this (which they can't).

GMAC have 8 weeks to come to their final decision on your complaint so you need to make sure you get everything in the complaint and I would assume that based on previous complaints they may deduct an amount as a gesture of good will. If you aren't happy with that then you can proceed to the Financial Ombudsman. Unfortunately they seem to disregard any legal interpretation of the Consumer Credit Act so a difference argument may need to be put forward such as the termination statement in your agreement that says as long as you have paid 50% and took reasonable car of the goods then you owe nothing more.

One other thing to look out for is that they may apply a default on your wife's credit file. I won't go in to detail but I did explain why they can't do this inanother thread although it relates to excess mileage the reasons why still apply -> http://legalbeagles.info/forums/show...960&highlight=

Did Manheim carry out the inspection if so they are very poor at what they do they will make sure in any report to GMAC that they will make money to cover their inspection and make money for GMAC in the process I have been stung for a bill of £663 and the inspector never did theinspection to the NAMA standards so make a complaint to Manheim and GMAC about how poor the inspection was and how unprofessional GMAC are stand by your guns. They are ripping everyone off

[DrAJ]

Re: Voluntary Termination of HP Agreement with GMAC

Yes it was Manheim who carried out the inspection. They are indeed poor. And the report contained factual inaccuracies which I have complained about as well as containing a signature when it was not agreed to be signed.

We are sticking to our guns and refusing to pay a penny of the £848 damages they are claiming. I have complained to GMAC - who basically rejected the complaint and did not investigate it properly. Apparently it is perfectly OK to falsify documentation etc. They did offer to reduce the bill by £120 as a gesture of goodwill - an amount which is quite frankly an insult! Also in their summary of the complaint they provided 2 versions of the inspection report with differing wording and the same digital signature!

It has since come to light that GMAC sold the vehicle for £1850 - which agrees with the valuation I obtained from Autotrader. According to Autotrader, the vehicle was in 'Good' condition. And it achieved this price without any repairs being done! This figure came from the statement of account provided by GMAC. It shows a credit of £1850 and a balance of £848 - ie GMAC did not actually suffer any loss on the sale. Yet they claim the vehicle sold for less than its valuation!! As they have not come up with any evidence to prove a loss, I regard the whole claim as fraudulent.

I have since complained to the Financial Ombudsman - who quite frankly are about as useful as a chocolate teapot! They cannot even summarise the details of the complaint correctly, disregard the Consumer Credit Act but still seem to think it is OK to falsify documentation.

I am now minded to follow up the complaint with Action Fraud and the Information Commissioner...

[mally h]

Re: Voluntary Termination of HP Agreement with GMAC

Yes it was Manheim who carried out the inspection. They are indeed poor. And the report contained factual inaccuracies which I have complained about as well as containing a signature when it was not agreed to be signed.

We are sticking to our guns and refusing to pay a penny of the £848 damages they are claiming. I have complained to GMAC - who basically rejected the complaint and did not investigate it properly. Apparently it is perfectly OK to falsify documentation etc. They did offer to reduce the bill by £120 as a gesture of goodwill - an amount which is quite frankly an insult! Also in their summary of the complaint they provided 2 versions of the inspection report with differing wording and the same digital signature!

It has since come to light that GMAC sold the vehicle for £1850 - which agrees with the valuation I obtained from Autotrader. According to Autotrader, the vehicle was in 'Good' condition. And it achieved this price without any repairs being done! This figure came from the statement of account provided by GMAC. It shows a credit of £1850 and a balance of £848 - ie GMAC did not actually suffer any loss on the sale. Yet they claim the vehicle sold for less than its valuation!! As they have not come up with any evidence to prove a loss, I regard the whole claim as fraudulent.

I have since complained to the Financial Ombudsman - who quite frankly are about as useful as a chocolate teapot! They cannot even summarise the details of the complaint correctly, disregard the Consumer Credit Act but still seem to think it is OK to falsify documentation.

I am now minded to follow up the complaint with Action Fraud and the Information Commissioner...

I wrote a email to the CEO of manheim Michael. Buxton@manheim.co.uk and quoted that the inspector never carried out the inspection to the MAMA standards as I have worked in the car manufacturing busy for 15 years at General Motors and know how to inspect a car and not stand right up to the car with a microscope and find every type of blemish. if they did this in the factory they would never get a car out of the factory.

I have also wrote to Gmac CEO edhart.paulat@GMFS.com ? I have had no response from GMAC as yet but Manheim are supposedly investigating this issue as I quoted, that I could take them to NAMA for wrongful inspections and practices. They also said that they would re-inspect the vehicle but it seems to me that the car has already gone to auction and has been sold so how can they do another inspection if someone else has bought the car. The fact being is these companies are out to get as much money as possible because the second car market prices are falling and people are not buying cars due the fact they have not got the money anymore to go out and buy one.

GMAc ALSO OFFERED ME A 20% OFF goodwill gesture but expected me to have my credit card available there andthen to pay up the woman who I spoke to very very forceful in the way she spoke and she quoted that the report photos seemed very bad. for one she is not in a position to comment on the findings of the report and she is not a qualified person to give her opinion, I also said that I was in dispute with Manheim over the report findings, but she wasn't interested in that side of things she just wanted the money. I said i am not prepared to pay that amount of money £663 until someone has investigated my complaint.

I then was sent a solicitors letter from Shoosmiths asking for the monies. So I phoned them and explained the situation of what has gone on and they have supposedly have put in a complaint for me against Manheim and GMAC, She has also put the account on hold for a duration of 8 weeks. I want a full explanation of what has gone on and an apology from the customer services otherwise they can whistle as loud as they like.

I hope some of the info I have given you is of any use and please let me know if you have any success.

[DrAJ]

Re: Voluntary Termination of HP Agreement with GMAC

Our complaint was rejected by GMAC but equally they also failed to answer any of the detailed points I raised or to provide any evidence that would actually prove their case. In the meantime Shoosmiths were instructed to pursue as normal.

On that basis we wrote to Shoosmiths in April reminding them of s173 of the Consumer Credit Act and telling them we would not be paying. I also said that GMAC did not investigate the complaint properly. It would be our final response but I also expected them to confirm by return that the matter would be closed. However, I have not had that confirmation (nor any other correspondence from Shoosmiths).

Subsequently in May we received the statement of account from GMAC - it showed they sold the vehicle for £1850 and does rather prove that they did not suffer any loss on the sale and in doing so also strengthens our case!

My nagging concern is the account still shows an amount owing of £848 and at some point GMAC might choose to sell the (disputed) debt on. I do not expect them to take it to court but I still think they should be required to resolve the matter - ie either let the court decide or update their records to show the debt as nil.

[mally h]

Re: Voluntary Termination of HP Agreement with GMAC

Our complaint was rejected by GMAC but equally they also failed to answer any of the detailed points I raised or to provide any evidence that would actually prove their case. In the meantime Shoosmiths were instructed to pursue as normal.

On that basis we wrote to Shoosmiths in April reminding them of s173 of the Consumer Credit Act and telling them we would not be paying. I also said that GMAC did not investigate the complaint properly. It would be our final response but I also expected them to confirm by return that the matter would be closed. However, I have not had that confirmation (nor any other correspondence from Shoosmiths).

Subsequently in May we received the statement of account from GMAC - it showed they sold the vehicle for £1850 and does rather prove that they did not suffer any loss on the sale and in doing so also strengthens our case!

My nagging concern is the account still shows an amount owing of £848 and at some point GMAC might choose to sell the (disputed) debt on. I do not expect them to take it to court but I still think they should be required to resolve the matter - ie either let the court decide or update their records to show the debt as nil.

They might sell the debt on but unless a high writ is out against you they can't force you to pay these people love to mess with peoples lives and I waiting on an investigation by Manheim into their findings of how the inspector carried out his inspection, wht ever the outcome they always do it to favour themselves. So will then get in contact with the BVRLA and mention this problem to them. I am going to take this situation to watchdog eventually as this code of practice by these compnies is becoming more wide spread and people are frightened of them.

Bring it on I say the more people we can get to come forward with these types of problems we might be able to get a case together and sirt them out once and for all.

[DrAJ]

Re: Voluntary Termination of HP Agreement with GMAC

Well after thinking everything had gone quiet, a couple of days ago a letter arrives from GMAC - from their Legal Recoveries and Litigation Department. They are claiming the £848 and expect us to complete an income and expenditure form and provide payment proposals. They can go whistle...

So I fired off an email to Shoosmiths - it seems that Shoosmiths have indeed closed their files (they have realised they weren't going to get anywhere with me!) and have passed it back to GMAC.

In the meantime I have updated the Financial Ombudsman with my thoughts - I'm not optimistic though as they seem minded to side with GMAC. I also got another (free) valuation from Autotrader and have pointed out Autotrader's definition of "Good" condition (which is worth repeating here for the record):

•Minor or cosmetic damage to bodywork, wheels, tyres and interior
•Minor or cosmetic damage to lights, glass and mirrors
•All tyres are safe and legal
•Documentation and keys present
•Partial, documented service history
•Current MOT
•No outstanding finance
•The car has never been written off
•It is not a category C or D vehicle

Our vehicle sold at auction for more than the current 'good' valuation and did not require repair. As far as I am concerned it is still up to GMAC to prove a loss.

I am also going to forward what I have to the Financial Conduct Authority. They are currently investigating the motor finance market in general. Although I don't think they will investigate our individual case as such they definitely need to see the information I will share with them.

See this story on the FCA website - www.fca.org.uk/news/news-stories/our-work-motor-finance

[mally h]

Re: Voluntary Termination of HP Agreement with GMAC

Well after thinking everything had gone quiet, a couple of days ago a letter arrives from GMAC - from their Legal Recoveries and Litigation Department. They are claiming the £848 and expect us to complete an income and expenditure form and provide payment proposals. They can go whistle...

So I fired off an email to Shoosmiths - it seems that Shoosmiths have indeed closed their files (they have realised they weren't going to get anywhere with me!) and have passed it back to GMAC.

In the meantime I have updated the Financial Ombudsman with my thoughts - I'm not optimistic though as they seem minded to side with GMAC. I also got another (free) valuation from Autotrader and have pointed out Autotrader's definition of "Good" condition (which is worth repeating here for the record):

•Minor or cosmetic damage to bodywork, wheels, tyres and interior
•Minor or cosmetic damage to lights, glass and mirrors
•All tyres are safe and legal
•Documentation and keys present
•Partial, documented service history
•Current MOT
•No outstanding finance
•The car has never been written off
•It is not a category C or D vehicle

Our vehicle sold at auction for more than the current 'good' valuation and did not require repair. As far as I am concerned it is still up to GMAC to prove a loss.

I am also going to forward what I have to the Financial Conduct Authority. They are currently investigating the motor finance market in general. Although I don't think they will investigate our individual case as such they definitely need to see the information I will share with them.

See this story on the FCA website - http://www.fca.org.uk/news/news-stor...-motor-finance

I got a reply back off Manheim about the investigation that they have carried out because of the conplaint that I have made to the CEO but instead of sending their findings to me they have sent them straight to GMAC, but my concern is because of the info they are sending to GMAC I should have a copy of their investigation under the freedom of information act. nothing has been sent to me for my appraisal so I can't comment on anything thats been sent to GMAC.

My next thing is I have read all the comments on the mis-selling of PCP and this could be our get out clause with them owing us money for a change. My thoughts are that I will not get a positive response back from GMAC about my complaints as they are only interested in getting that money from us because of an inspection company thats in hand in hand to rip off the everyday person.

[madzak]

Re: Voluntary Termination of HP Agreement with GMAC

Hey,

I'm going through the same process with GMAC and have been since November 2016 when I VT'd my car. They"re wanting £1k to pay for 'damages' etc, even though the car was in the exact same condition as when I bought it.

Had the usual half price offer and request for income/expenditure (who do they think they are?!). Latest correspondence is that if I don't pay the half price by end of August 2017 they might go down the route of county court judgement.

To add complications, because I live in Scotland I'm having to go to a solicitor in Wales for advice...but GMAC can run and jump if they think they're getting any money from me!

Should hopefully have an update on solicitors recommended action in a few days...will let ye know how I get on.

[mally h]

Re: Voluntary Termination of HP Agreement with GMAC

Hey,

I'm going through the same process with GMAC and have been since November 2016 when I VT'd my car. They"re wanting £1k to pay for 'damages' etc, even though the car was in the exact same condition as when I bought it.

Had the usual half price offer and request for income/expenditure (who do they think they are?!). Latest correspondence is that if I don't pay the half price by end of August 2017 they might go down the route of county court judgement.

To add complications, because I live in Scotland I'm having to go to a solicitor in Wales for advice...but GMAC can run and jump if they think they're getting any money from me!

Should hopefully have an update on solicitors recommended action in a few days...will let ye know how I get on.

I am now dealing with the the management team at Manheim to gather further info on the standardised inspection process as I feel that people maybe getting unnecessary charges due to poor quality of inspection.

As an average people who are returning their cars must be getting stung for hundreds of pounds this must be an industry complaint waiting to happen. If anyone wins their case we need to know on how they did it, as this could be the next PPI (hahaha).

Also there was a section on the internet about PCP and it could be the next PPI claim waiting to happen I think was written by the Telegraph. If I find anymore info out I will contact you with my findings.

[DrAJ]

Re: Voluntary Termination of HP Agreement with GMAC

I have now had an update from the Financial Ombudsman Service - the complaint has been referred to an ombudsman as I have disagreed comprehensively with the Investigator's assessment. The Ombudsman has requested further information from GMAC and has also asked if we have been experiencing any financial difficulties. Well yes we have experienced financial difficulties and this was the basic reason for wanting to return the vehicle; not that GMAC care. I feel that the Ombudsman is coming round to my view, but I won't hold my breath just yet knowing how few VT cases seem to have been decided in favour of the consumer.

Meanwhile, I also have an update from GMAC who have sent a "Special Discounted Settlement Offer" which is now reduced to £361 (they had been claiming £848, it was reduced to £722 now this has been halved) and is valid for one month provided we pay in full.

GMAC say "We are very mindful of the existing difficult economic climate, and in an effort to resolve the serious arrears position on your account we are offering you the opportunity to take advantage of the special discounted settlement amount quoted above. This offer is made without prejudice to our rights under the terms and conditions of the original Hire Purchase agreement you signed with us.

If cleared funds are paid by this date, any adverse credit data recorded at the credit reference agencies will also be amended to show this debt has been settled in full.

If you do not (or cannot) take advantage of this special settlement offer by its expiry date then the full outstanding balance and collection charges will remain due and payable and we must give notice that county court proceedings may well be issued to recover the sums due."

They are so arrogant! They are still treating this as arrears, now have recorded incorrect information with the credit reference areas, still haven't provided proof that they actually suffered any loss, and haven't answered any of the detailed points raised in the complaint. Needless to say I am not going to be accepting their offer; although I am more than happy to see them in court! I have added the latest information to the complaint with the FOS. Any advice on how to respond to GMAC?

[mally h]

Re: Voluntary Termination of HP Agreement with GMAC

I have now had an update from the Financial Ombudsman Service - the complaint has been referred to an ombudsman as I have disagreed comprehensively with the Investigator's assessment. The Ombudsman has requested further information from GMAC and has also asked if we have been experiencing any financial difficulties. Well yes we have experienced financial difficulties and this was the basic reason for wanting to return the vehicle; not that GMAC care. I feel that the Ombudsman is coming round to my view, but I won't hold my breath just yet knowing how few VT cases seem to have been decided in favour of the consumer.

Meanwhile, I also have an update from GMAC who have sent a "Special Discounted Settlement Offer" which is now reduced to £361 (they had been claiming £848, it was reduced to £722 now this has been halved) and is valid for one month provided we pay in full.

GMAC say "We are very mindful of the existing difficult economic climate, and in an effort to resolve the serious arrears position on your account we are offering you the opportunity to take advantage of the special discounted settlement amount quoted above. This offer is made without prejudice to our rights under the terms and conditions of the original Hire Purchase agreement you signed with us.

If cleared funds are paid by this date, any adverse credit data recorded at the credit reference agencies will also be amended to show this debt has been settled in full.

If you do not (or cannot) take advantage of this special settlement offer by its expiry date then the full outstanding balance and collection charges will remain due and payable and we must give notice that county court proceedings may well be issued to recover the sums due."

They are so arrogant! They are still treating this as arrears, now have recorded incorrect information with the credit reference areas, still haven't provided proof that they actually suffered any loss, and haven't answered any of the detailed points raised in the complaint. Needless to say I am not going to be accepting their offer; although I am more than happy to see them in court! I have added the latest information to the complaint with the FOS. Any advice on how to respond to GMAC?

I am investigating the way people are being treated, by asking people that I know in the car industry on how these inspection companies are actually carrying out their inspections and whether or not if they are following the guide lines as the OEM main manufacturers, who have a policy of 1 metre away or in some instances a 2 metre rule, to inspect the car before it leaves the factories.

As you know the car market is taking a battering at the moment and the price of second hand cars is falling, so when a car goes to auction they aren't getting the money that they want so the only way is to find faults with the car so you make up the short fall and also pay for the inspection that otherwise, the finance company has to pay for.

Some of the people that I have spoken to who work for Vauxhall, Jaguar and Mcclaren have all told that these inspection companies companies are training monkeys to carry out these inspections and not to their level of expertise as the car manufacturer. So when it comes down to knowledge and common sense there is none and they will put down every problem that they find.

One solution is to find someone who has worked for the inspection company who's willing to give some form of info to you take to court to prove that you have been set up to pay these unnecessary costs and whether they where on a commission basis for the company.

One way would be to go on there face book page and put a quote on there asking if anyone knows of any wrong doings about the inspection company then you might have a lever against GMAC for them to drop the case or find them to be fraudulent in their everyday business. Don't forget GMAC got fined for there handling of their morgauges a few years ago so maybe this could be going the same way.

Also GMAC claim in their fair wear and tear policy BVRLA standards, they are not even a member of the BVRLA, so how can they quote a policy from an institute they their not a member of. The inspection company is and Shoosmiths are but GMAC are not. They also send out paperwork out for you to sign with these terms and conditions on, so isn't that something to consider.

Last but not least the ombudsman, that I have found have always been in favor of GMAC and not the everyday person it seems a hopeless way of trying to defend yourself also GMAC can't take you to court while you are in the process of dealing with the ombudsman as it part of their procedures that they have to wait for the outcome of the investigation and you have up to 6 months from the date of a letter that they sent you indicating your rights to bring in the ombudsman.

If I get any info I will get in touch.

[DrAJ]

Re: Voluntary Termination of HP Agreement with GMAC

Oh the whole case is basically fraudulent - from GMAC claiming damages for a loss that they haven't sustained, supplying false information to the credit reference agencies, ignoring the Consumer Credit Act etc; then Manheim for the dodgy inspection and also falsifying the report by putting my wife's signature on it when she never agreed to sign; and Shoosmiths giving false statements to attempt to intimidate the customer into paying up. All of them colluding together. And an apparently toothless regulatory regime that lets them get away with it. I also feel there's enough for a separate complaint to the Information Commissioner - I'm not convinced the FOS will pass on the details of concerns relating to Data Protection so I will do it anyway.

[DrAJ]

In December we received the final decision from the Financial Ombudsman Service which was not to uphold our complaint. Based on the experience of others and also because the FOS never seem to decide in favour of the consumer we are not at all surprised.

We reject the decision, which we are free to do, but are very disappointed with the Financial Ombudsman Service. I have asked if the Ombudsman could please explain why they think the Consumer Credit Act 1974 does not apply and why GMAC / Vauxhall Finance should not be bound by the law? In fact the Ombudsman has has made no reference whatsoever to the Consumer Credit Act in the decision. So that makes the summary of the complaint which they will publish on their website at best only half reasonable. They would rather let GMAC continue ripping off customers and fraudulently claim damages. The FOS seem to be accountable to nobody.

I decided that if the Ombudsman rejected the complaint I would raise it with my MP, which I have now done. I also had a phone call from BBC Watchdog this week and I’m passing all the correspondence I have on to the BBC...