As a result of the complaints the company has been told that it must ensure that it is made clear that it is a loan broker that passes details of applicants onto other lenders, and that it is not an actual lender itself.

Loans through YES are designed for those with damaged credit, and because of this the loans that are offered through the broker are typically high interest loans.

Applicants were not happy when they were told that they would have to pay a referral fee for being introduced to a lender, as many were under the impression that YES was the lender and would be the company that provided them with the loan. The cost of the referral fee charges varied based on the size of the loan being taken.

The company has also been slated for failing to return brokerage fees as well as failing to be clear about being a broker and not a lender.

If a customer pulls out of the applications process or the company fails to find a loan for the applicant it must, by law, refund the referral fee, but in many cases it has failed to do this according to reports. It has now been told by the OFT that it must ensure that refunds are provided within thirty days to eligible consumers.

An official from the OFT said: ‘Many businesses charge an up-front fee for brokering loans for consumers, and customers should be aware that if they use a broker but do not accept the credit offered, no matter what the reason, they are entitled to a refund less £5. The OFT will continue to take action against companies who fail to do so.’

Yes Loans criticised by OFT is a post from: Glitec Loans

OFT officials went on to state that in some cases the issues and complaints were dealt with and rectified relatively quickly, but in other cases the buyers experienced ’significant detriment, distress and inconvenience’ due to the problems being major ones. This is particularly true if the problems relate to plumbing or heating issues, according to the watchdog.

The investigation also revealed that there were some problems relating to the sales process for new homes. Officials from the OFT said that they had concerns over the clarity of the information being provided to buyers as well as the reservation fees charged. They also claimed that some of the terms and conditions in the contracts were potentially unfair. A number of agencies will be working together to put into place a code of conduct, and this includes the Home Builders Federation, the National House Building Council, and the Council of Mortgage Lenders.

An official from the OFT said: ‘We have found the home-building market to be generally competitive, with no evidence that individual homebuilders have the ability to restrict supply in order to inflate prices or to hoard land for anti-competitive reasons. However, we have concluded that homebuyers need more protection when buying a new home and we have worked hard with the industry to help it develop a new approach to self-regulation that will improve consumer protection.’

Help needed for homebuyers states OFT is a post from: Glitec Loans

This is why a number of households have turned to sale and rent back schemes, which in theory sound like an effective solution. These firms purchase the home from the homeowner and then rent it back to them, often offering to rent it back on a permanent basis providing the tenancy agreement is adhered to. For the former homeowner this means no risk of repossession and no need to uproot the family and move on, although they will of course no longer be homeowners.

However, campaigners and officials have raised grave concerns over a number of flaws with many sale and rent back schemes, which results in the consumer being treated unfairly.

Firstly, many officials claim that sale and rent back firms offer a price that is way below the market value of the property, which means that the homeowner gets very little when they sell the home.

Secondly, there are also concerns that some sale and rent back firms promise the homeowner that they will be able to rent back the property indefinitely but then fail to keep to that promise, which means that not only does the former homeowner get a very unfair price for the home, but is also left to find somewhere else to live.

These concerns have now resulted in the Office of Fair Trading launching a probe into these schemes, following calls from a number of officials and agencies to do so. One official from a homeless charity, Shelter, said: ‘This study is urgently needed, and comes on the back of vulnerable people losing their homes to some dishonest sale and leaseback companies.’

He also said: ‘These companies encourage hard-up homeowners to sign up for what is plainly a very bad deal. Shelter has seen cases where homeowners have not only lost out financially after selling their homes to an sale and leaseback company, but also lack any right to permanently stay in their home and ultimately find themselves homeless. Shelter has called on the Government for regulation in this growing sector, and we hope the OFT study will offer the public improved protection against the hidden dangers of some schemes and ensure all sale and leaseback companies operate in best interests of consumers.’

An OFT official added: ‘Sale and rent back schemes might be helpful for some consumers but there are a number of potential concerns including whether consumers in difficult circumstances are making well informed choices. We are therefore prioritising this work to take a good look at whether consumers are adequately informed and protected.’

Recent additions:

• Consumers warned to be aware of the rising cost of home improvements
• Lack of first time buyers causes problems throughout housing market
• Much higher deposits needed by first time buyers
• Rocketing fees from mortgage lenders
• MP called consumers miserable

Sale and rent back schemes to be investigated by OFT is a post from: Glitec Loans