Tweet
Time to sort out the other halfs WFS claim. Lots of similarities to my previous PPI claims and also got some DPA breaches which WFS are so good at doing.
Welcome Financial Services Ltd
Mere Way,
Ruddington Fields Business Park
Ruddington
Nottingham
NG116NZ
20th December 2010
Re: Account numbers 120****(Loan 1), 142**** (Loan 2) & 182**** (Loan 3) PPI Mis-Selling & Section 10 Notice under the Data Protection Act 1998
Dear Sirs,
I am writing to inform you that I wish to make a complaint against Welcome Financial Services Ltd (WFS) for their mis-selling of payment protection insurance policies to me which have been detrimental to me as a customer.
Loan (1) 120****
I purchased an initial loan policy agreement number 120**** from you on 09/03/2004 in connection with an unsecured personal loan for the sum of £1518 which included a Payment Protection Insurance (PPI), payment amount of £293.20. At the time of taking out the loan I was told be the agent of Welcome Financial Services Ltd that a loan could be offered to me only if I was to take out PPI, thus in my opinion making the PPI a condition for getting the loan. I agreed to it but feel in was under duress. After a while of having discussions with the agent at WFS I was told by this agent that they had to get a colleague to come into the interview room to speak with me and some time after a large man entered the room and stood over the table and said to me, you need to keep up the payments and not miss even one as we will come to your house and visit you and also contact your family members or words to that effect. At this time I felt threatened and intimidated by the staff at the Worcester branch of WFS.
No attempt was made to ascertain if the PPI provided was fit for purpose, suitable for my needs, or if indeed it was required at all. It has now become obvious to myself that this PPI policy was without doubt surplus to my requirements.
Loan (2) 142****
On 02/12/04, I approached WFS to top up my original loan, something which was heavily sold to me at the time of inception of my first loan with WFS. This was due to financial difficulties I was having at the time. On 02/12/04 I entered into a new loan, agreement number 142**** with WFS for an amount of £2209.09 and this also included a single premium PPI policy amount of £384.09. At the inception of this second loan no discussion was entered into regarding PPI and the agent left the room and came back with all the paperwork completed which included PPI and again I was led to believe this was a condition of being accepted for the loan.
Loan (3) 182****
On 31/03/06 I attended the Worcester Branch of WFS to discuss reducing my loan repayments as I was on maternity leave and my circumstances had changed and on this date entered into a new loan, agreement number 182****. At the inception of this loan I asked why this loan didn’t have PPI and was told there was no point in having it on the loan as I was only paying reduced amounts and it wasn’t worth it.
Since becoming aware of the mis-selling of this PPI and the recent investigations into PPI by the Office of Fair Trading, Financial Services Authority, Competition Commission and Citizens Advice Bureau there is no doubt you have mis-sold this policy to myself for following reasons:
• I was informed that I would have a better chance of getting the loan if Payment Protection Insurance was included.
• I was pressurised into buying the Payment Protection Insurance by staff at WFS Worcester branch.
• I was not asked whether I already had any existing insurance or employer cover/benefits that would cover the repayments.
• It was never explained that there are exclusions within the policy clauses that could seriously affect any potential claim I made on this insurance.
• The PPI policy exclusions were never properly explained, so I was unable to make an informed decision as to whether this insurance was required or not.
• I was never informed that this insurance is only optional.
• At the time of sale and purchase, I believed that the PPI was compulsory.
• I was led to believe that my application would have been rejected had I not included the PPI.
• It was certainly not in my interest to purchase this particular policy.
• I was never informed that if PPI was required, I could purchase it elsewhere.
• I paid in advance for the PPI but it was never explained that there are other methods of payment available.
• It was never explained that by adding the PPI premium to the loan amount, it would incur a huge amount of interest over the fixed period repayment term.
• It was not explained that the PPI would not run for the full term of my loan.
I have also noticed, and will bring to the attention of any forthcoming investigative body, or Judicial procedure, the following information:
• The premiums were very expensive and was not in my interests.
• Adding the Single Premium Policy has without doubt exacerbated the level of debt I have had and adds to my financial hardship.
In line with the FOS recommendations it is requested that the overall situation be restored as if PPI had never been included. This will entail:
a) A refund of the monthly payments and loan interest charged thereon that have actually been paid towards the overall loan in excess of those that would have been needed, if the original loan had been sold without the PPI policy;
b) Restructuring of the loan going forward so that the amount owed, the monthly repayments, the term and the charges reflect those that would have applied, if the original loan had been sold without the PPI policy.
c) In addition, interest at the rate of 8% simple per annum to any excess payments made from the time each payment was made to the point that Welcome Financial Services Ltd pays them back to myself.
I now require you to rearrange the current loan as if PPI had never been included on the afore mentioned loans. This will entail a refund of the PPI premiums paid to date and loan interest charged thereon, plus 8% interest from 9th March 2004 to 20th December 2010 and on all 3 loans. I now consider this to be an overpayment and require this amount to be refunded in the form of a cheque.
Section 10 Notice under the Data Protection Act 1998
In addition to all of the above I also wish to complain about some inaccurate entries on my credit file.
Complaint 1)
I have had 3 loans with WFS and as mentioned above the first loan (Agreement Number = 120****) inception date was 09/03/2004. My credit file shows no record of this loan whatsoever. Why is this? Surely all lending activity should’ve been recorded on my credit file. I never missed a payment on this loan and therefore it would be beneficial to help me to obtain future credit. Therefore I require you to pay me £100 in compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused in relation to this matter.
Complaint 2)
The second loan (Agreement Number = 142****) I had with WFS which was included mis-sold PPI from the previous loan and yet more mis-sold PPI on this loan therefore shows an inaccurate loan amount figure. It also shows that I had 3 late payments. The only time I have missed or been late with a payment is when it has been authorised by WFS which was something I have done on three occasions but was told I could do this. At no point was it mentioned that this would have a detrimental effect on my credit file or that they would be recorded on my file as late payments. In fact when I asked about having these payment breaks, I was told it wouldn’t effect my credit file. Under Section 10 of the Data Protection Act 1998 you have a responsibility as a data processor/controller to record accurate information relating to me as a data subject relating to my lending history and you have failed to do this. I therefore require these late payment markers to be removed immediately and also require you to pay me £100 in compensation for the distress and inconvenience you have caused me and my family as a direct result in your inaccurate processing of my personal data. This is a fair amount as recommended by the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS).
Complaint 3)
The third loan (Agreement Number = 182****) which supersedes the second loan and also would include an inaccurate balance and total amount of credit due to the mis-sold PPI from the previous two loans. This loan, which was taken out on 31/03/2004 over a 60 month period, is still ongoing and has been kept up to date without any missed payments. The last payment is due in March 2011. A faultless repayment history again would improve my chances of obtaining future credit, however for some reason Welcome Financial Services Ltd doesn’t even record this loan on my credit file. This has angered me and caused me a great deal of distress. In respect of this matter, I also require you to provide me with £100 in compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. As it has effected my ability to obtain credit and I have been previously rejected for a mobile phone contract with Orange which I had to ask my partner Mr TANZARELLI to take out in his name.
Once you have instructed one of your compliance officers to make the three corrections to my credit file showing up to date lending history I require you to write to me to confirm you have done this and I also require a written apology from Welcome Financial Services Ltd for your inaccurate processing of my personal data. I am also requesting that you post me a personal cheque for £300 for the three separate DPA 1998 breaches. Should you fail to do this then I shall either escalate these separate matters to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) or may even consider Court action.
I am assuming that you would prefer to enter into a sincere dialogue about all these matters, rather than merely responding with your standard template letters and leaflets. If you do not respond within 14 days I will not hesitate in taking any further action that is necessary. I believe that this time frame is sufficient for a large company such as yours with its dedicated staff and departments.
Please also be aware that my partner Mr TANZARELLI (a founder member of the Penalty Action Group), is watching this matter with great interest as my claim has a number of similarities to his previous complaints with Welcome Financial Services Ltd, which have now been upheld by WFS. He will be able to inform me of any attempt you make to try and provide me with standard templated responses, therefore to save us all some time, might I suggest you bring this matter to a swift and amicable conclusion.
Yours faithfully,
Mere Way,
Ruddington Fields Business Park
Ruddington
Nottingham
NG116NZ
20th December 2010
Re: Account numbers 120****(Loan 1), 142**** (Loan 2) & 182**** (Loan 3) PPI Mis-Selling & Section 10 Notice under the Data Protection Act 1998
Dear Sirs,
I am writing to inform you that I wish to make a complaint against Welcome Financial Services Ltd (WFS) for their mis-selling of payment protection insurance policies to me which have been detrimental to me as a customer.
Loan (1) 120****
I purchased an initial loan policy agreement number 120**** from you on 09/03/2004 in connection with an unsecured personal loan for the sum of £1518 which included a Payment Protection Insurance (PPI), payment amount of £293.20. At the time of taking out the loan I was told be the agent of Welcome Financial Services Ltd that a loan could be offered to me only if I was to take out PPI, thus in my opinion making the PPI a condition for getting the loan. I agreed to it but feel in was under duress. After a while of having discussions with the agent at WFS I was told by this agent that they had to get a colleague to come into the interview room to speak with me and some time after a large man entered the room and stood over the table and said to me, you need to keep up the payments and not miss even one as we will come to your house and visit you and also contact your family members or words to that effect. At this time I felt threatened and intimidated by the staff at the Worcester branch of WFS.
No attempt was made to ascertain if the PPI provided was fit for purpose, suitable for my needs, or if indeed it was required at all. It has now become obvious to myself that this PPI policy was without doubt surplus to my requirements.
Loan (2) 142****
On 02/12/04, I approached WFS to top up my original loan, something which was heavily sold to me at the time of inception of my first loan with WFS. This was due to financial difficulties I was having at the time. On 02/12/04 I entered into a new loan, agreement number 142**** with WFS for an amount of £2209.09 and this also included a single premium PPI policy amount of £384.09. At the inception of this second loan no discussion was entered into regarding PPI and the agent left the room and came back with all the paperwork completed which included PPI and again I was led to believe this was a condition of being accepted for the loan.
Loan (3) 182****
On 31/03/06 I attended the Worcester Branch of WFS to discuss reducing my loan repayments as I was on maternity leave and my circumstances had changed and on this date entered into a new loan, agreement number 182****. At the inception of this loan I asked why this loan didn’t have PPI and was told there was no point in having it on the loan as I was only paying reduced amounts and it wasn’t worth it.
Since becoming aware of the mis-selling of this PPI and the recent investigations into PPI by the Office of Fair Trading, Financial Services Authority, Competition Commission and Citizens Advice Bureau there is no doubt you have mis-sold this policy to myself for following reasons:
• I was informed that I would have a better chance of getting the loan if Payment Protection Insurance was included.
• I was pressurised into buying the Payment Protection Insurance by staff at WFS Worcester branch.
• I was not asked whether I already had any existing insurance or employer cover/benefits that would cover the repayments.
• It was never explained that there are exclusions within the policy clauses that could seriously affect any potential claim I made on this insurance.
• The PPI policy exclusions were never properly explained, so I was unable to make an informed decision as to whether this insurance was required or not.
• I was never informed that this insurance is only optional.
• At the time of sale and purchase, I believed that the PPI was compulsory.
• I was led to believe that my application would have been rejected had I not included the PPI.
• It was certainly not in my interest to purchase this particular policy.
• I was never informed that if PPI was required, I could purchase it elsewhere.
• I paid in advance for the PPI but it was never explained that there are other methods of payment available.
• It was never explained that by adding the PPI premium to the loan amount, it would incur a huge amount of interest over the fixed period repayment term.
• It was not explained that the PPI would not run for the full term of my loan.
I have also noticed, and will bring to the attention of any forthcoming investigative body, or Judicial procedure, the following information:
• The premiums were very expensive and was not in my interests.
• Adding the Single Premium Policy has without doubt exacerbated the level of debt I have had and adds to my financial hardship.
In line with the FOS recommendations it is requested that the overall situation be restored as if PPI had never been included. This will entail:
a) A refund of the monthly payments and loan interest charged thereon that have actually been paid towards the overall loan in excess of those that would have been needed, if the original loan had been sold without the PPI policy;
b) Restructuring of the loan going forward so that the amount owed, the monthly repayments, the term and the charges reflect those that would have applied, if the original loan had been sold without the PPI policy.
c) In addition, interest at the rate of 8% simple per annum to any excess payments made from the time each payment was made to the point that Welcome Financial Services Ltd pays them back to myself.
I now require you to rearrange the current loan as if PPI had never been included on the afore mentioned loans. This will entail a refund of the PPI premiums paid to date and loan interest charged thereon, plus 8% interest from 9th March 2004 to 20th December 2010 and on all 3 loans. I now consider this to be an overpayment and require this amount to be refunded in the form of a cheque.
Section 10 Notice under the Data Protection Act 1998
In addition to all of the above I also wish to complain about some inaccurate entries on my credit file.
Complaint 1)
I have had 3 loans with WFS and as mentioned above the first loan (Agreement Number = 120****) inception date was 09/03/2004. My credit file shows no record of this loan whatsoever. Why is this? Surely all lending activity should’ve been recorded on my credit file. I never missed a payment on this loan and therefore it would be beneficial to help me to obtain future credit. Therefore I require you to pay me £100 in compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused in relation to this matter.
Complaint 2)
The second loan (Agreement Number = 142****) I had with WFS which was included mis-sold PPI from the previous loan and yet more mis-sold PPI on this loan therefore shows an inaccurate loan amount figure. It also shows that I had 3 late payments. The only time I have missed or been late with a payment is when it has been authorised by WFS which was something I have done on three occasions but was told I could do this. At no point was it mentioned that this would have a detrimental effect on my credit file or that they would be recorded on my file as late payments. In fact when I asked about having these payment breaks, I was told it wouldn’t effect my credit file. Under Section 10 of the Data Protection Act 1998 you have a responsibility as a data processor/controller to record accurate information relating to me as a data subject relating to my lending history and you have failed to do this. I therefore require these late payment markers to be removed immediately and also require you to pay me £100 in compensation for the distress and inconvenience you have caused me and my family as a direct result in your inaccurate processing of my personal data. This is a fair amount as recommended by the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS).
Complaint 3)
The third loan (Agreement Number = 182****) which supersedes the second loan and also would include an inaccurate balance and total amount of credit due to the mis-sold PPI from the previous two loans. This loan, which was taken out on 31/03/2004 over a 60 month period, is still ongoing and has been kept up to date without any missed payments. The last payment is due in March 2011. A faultless repayment history again would improve my chances of obtaining future credit, however for some reason Welcome Financial Services Ltd doesn’t even record this loan on my credit file. This has angered me and caused me a great deal of distress. In respect of this matter, I also require you to provide me with £100 in compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. As it has effected my ability to obtain credit and I have been previously rejected for a mobile phone contract with Orange which I had to ask my partner Mr TANZARELLI to take out in his name.
Once you have instructed one of your compliance officers to make the three corrections to my credit file showing up to date lending history I require you to write to me to confirm you have done this and I also require a written apology from Welcome Financial Services Ltd for your inaccurate processing of my personal data. I am also requesting that you post me a personal cheque for £300 for the three separate DPA 1998 breaches. Should you fail to do this then I shall either escalate these separate matters to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) or may even consider Court action.
I am assuming that you would prefer to enter into a sincere dialogue about all these matters, rather than merely responding with your standard template letters and leaflets. If you do not respond within 14 days I will not hesitate in taking any further action that is necessary. I believe that this time frame is sufficient for a large company such as yours with its dedicated staff and departments.
Please also be aware that my partner Mr TANZARELLI (a founder member of the Penalty Action Group), is watching this matter with great interest as my claim has a number of similarities to his previous complaints with Welcome Financial Services Ltd, which have now been upheld by WFS. He will be able to inform me of any attempt you make to try and provide me with standard templated responses, therefore to save us all some time, might I suggest you bring this matter to a swift and amicable conclusion.
Yours faithfully,
Comment