Pardon me if this has already been discussed on here.

Can someone please explain to me how, apparently, up to 23 million people may be entitled to compensation (which we will all end up paying one way or another...) over the finance they took out to buy their car because, as I understand it, there were commissions paid by the lenders to the companies selling the cars ?

1 - I don't ever buy stuff on credit (that's why my car is 11 years old...) but if I did buy a car on finance I would assume the seller was getting a commission from the finance company !

2 - But whether they were aware of any commission or not is surely irrelevant anyway ? The buyer is told what their repayments will be and they either think that's acceptable (and then buy the car) or they think it is too expensive (and don't buy the car). Is it just me but I cannot see how it matters who is making what money from the deal if the customer was happy to sign up for it at the quoted price in the first place.

If I had to find credit (14 yo car buy with cash and save for the next one), I'd look for the cheapest way to get it.

I think the thing is that buyers were not told the level of kick back that the salespeople were getting so it became "mis-selling"

For some things, our useless quangos appear to go overboard (this, DPFs?) whilst on others (broadband prices, water companies, anyone?) they are absolutely toothless? The "ambulance chaser" solicitors are only too keen to get involved.
Don't get me started on banks who are allowed to create money from nothing and then charge interest on it!:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IB2wLjqihjM&t=45s

 

14 minutes ago, Shearers said:

For some things, our useless quangos appear to go overboard (this, DPFs?) whilst on others (broadband prices, water companies, anyone?) they are absolutely toothless? The "ambulance chaser" solicitors are only too keen to get involved.
Don't get me started on banks who are allowed to create money from nothing and then charge interest on it!:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IB2wLjqihjM&t=45s

I agree with this.

14 minutes ago, Shearers said:

I think the thing is that buyers were not told the level of kick back that the salespeople were getting so it became "mis-selling"

I still don't see what difference it makes ! The buyer is given a price for a service and they accept it or they don't, why should it matter how high the kick backs / commissions were ? We live in a free market, sellers can charge what they want and they do not have to justify their prices to anyone, buyers have the choice if if they accept it or not.

I just see this in the same way as the diesel "emissions scandal" compensation claims industry.

You don't need to.be a genius to figure out that with any financial product someone, somewhere, will be making money. If you don't like the deal you're being offered, you can try and negotiate something  more to your liking or simply take your business elsewhere.

I wonder if these claims will apply to 0% interest deals, as well?. Dealers are still encouraged to push these, on the basis that people may not be able to make the final payment and can then re-finance at a higher rate. Or, be sold another PCP deal at a similar monthly figure, irrespective of whether it's for a longer term and/or at a higher interest rate.

46 minutes ago, Shearers said:

Don't get me started on banks who are allowed to create money from nothing and then charge interest on it!:

I'll have you know my good lady wife spent her career in banking - though I usually tell people she was a call girl as it sounds more respectable!

 

I spent a whole career in 'retail', as far as I was concerned, the public was never aware of the 'commission' we sold items at, and why would they. It was our job to buy things at a reasonable cost, add on a decent margin, and sell them for a price that was acceptable to the customer to provide a profit to continue the business. As already stated, the whole ethos of this 'complaint' is simply stupid!

55 minutes ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

I just see this in the same way as the diesel "emissions scandal" compensation claims industry.

You don't need to.be a genius to figure out that with any financial product someone, somewhere, will be making money. If you don't like the deal you're being offered, you can try and negotiate something  more to your liking or simply take your business elsewhere.

I wonder if these claims will apply to 0% interest deals, as well?. Dealers are still encouraged to push these, on the basis that people may not be able to make the final payment and can then re-finance at a higher rate. Or, be sold another PCP deal at a similar monthly figure, irrespective of whether it's for a longer term and/or at a higher interest rate.

I'll have you know my good lady wife spent her career in banking - though I usually tell people she was a call girl as it sounds more respectable

I agree with everything apart from the diesel emissions scandal. Some people (probably not that many...) would have chosen, or been more likely to choose, a car with lower emissions, and therefore car manufacturers effectively lying about it deserve all they get.

8 minutes ago, Justin Smith said:

diesel emissions scandal.

My point on that one is that no one, as far as I can see, suffered an actual financial loss to be compensated for. On the contrary, some people actually benefited from the falsely claimed lower emissions in lower BIK bands on their company vehicles.

Whether the manufacturers deserved to be penalised by the authorities for telling fibs is a slightly different question.

8 minutes ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

My point on that one is that no one, as far as I can see, suffered an actual financial loss to be compensated for. On the contrary, some people actually benefited from the falsely claimed lower emissions in lower BIK bands on their company vehicles.

Whether the manufacturers deserved to be penalised by the authorities for telling fibs is a slightly different question.

So the HMRC should be getting a load of compensation from the manufactures then, hopefully it'd save the rest of us some tax !

It appears that the High Court appear to (almost) agree with us ? ! ?

1 hour ago, Justin Smith said:

It appears that the High Court appear to (almost) agree with us ? ! ?

I know, who'd have thunk - just shocking! Good to see common sense rear it's head.  Now, years ago, I bought some milk in Tesco and they didn't reveal to me the profit margin they made on it, anyone know of an ongoing class action I can join?? 🤣

I believe that the compensation now only relates to increased commission payable to the dealer if the dealer managed to agree a higher interest rate with the customer. So the dealer was incentivised to give the customer a bad deal on the interest rate which benefited the dealer (higher commission) and the finance company (higher interest) at the expense of the customer (overpaying for the finance).

At the time that the finance was agreed the customer was presumably happy with the finance deal offered, or they could have walked away from the deal and taken an alternative finance deal elsewhere. I expect a lot of these people will now be able to receive compensation for something that they were not concerned about until the possibility of a pay-out was publicised.

The same people who are being compensated will, in future, be charged more for their finance as the finance company's increase their rates to recover the money paid out.

1 minute ago, pcaouolte said:

The same people who are being compensated will, in future, be charged more for their finance as the finance company's increase their rates to recover the money paid out.

Kinda like losing your NCB in n accident. That would be great outcome, can't stand people that sign things they've no understanding of, if you don't understand, just ***** well ask!

It's baffling really. As we've already said, no-one forces you to buy a car, or accept a particular deal. It's not as if the country (up to a few years ago) wasn't awash with car dealerships competing for your business.

I see no real difference in this and, for example, finding Waitrose too dear so you'd go look at Sainsbury's, Tesco, Asda, Lidl and Aldi.

I am at least pleased to see the FCA and the likes of Martin Lewis are emphasising that there is no need to use a "claims company" but to sit tight until a FOC scheme is announced. I'm sick of seeing that "I've made my claim" ad. No doubt the suckers who've already fallen for it will be looking for someone to compensate them when they realise these leeches don't work for free!😀

I'm looking forward to the claims company that starts suing car companies for making false promises on EVs. You know, you can drive at least 'X' miles on a charge of 'Y' hours LOL

On that basis they could have been suing the same companies for false claims of mpg all these years.

18 minutes ago, mjt said:

On that basis they could have been suing the same companies for false claims of mpg all these years.

Didn't companies like VW already get a bl**dy nose for such deception?

13 minutes ago, StephenFord said:

Didn't companies like VW already get a bl**dy nose for such deception?

No.  VWs actually do decent MPG, unlike equivalent Fords.  However, the MPG was too good, meaning more NOx was produced, so the cheat device was to get through the NOx tests.  Tbh the tests were pointless anyway.  They were done in lab conditions on a rolling road.  So all you have to do is run a slightly different map when the rear wheels aren't moving to pass the static tests.

I still don't really buy the cheat element in all this. The EU said cars had to comply with certain parameters in their tests, which as we all know bear no resemblance to real life. So manufacturers made sure they did.

When I was doing various professional examinations, I put myself in the best possible position to pass. I analysed many years of past papers, and found that the same core  topics came up in perhaps 60% of cases. So I concentrated my revision on these, and passed everything without problem.

Was that cheating?😀

When I started working at a national retailer they left the answer sheet for the safety test on the table...  I ignored it and filled in my own answers.  Manager said I'd got a couple wrong and should have looked at the sheet!  Was that cheating? 

In all seriousness though, I do think what VW did was cheating.  Other manufacturers were doing the same.  And the tests were ridiculous.  But I just don't believe in two wrongs making a right myself.