Firstly, many thanks for all of your comments, feedback and your patience. There are a number of issues to take onboard so please bear with me while I work my way through them.

To begin with, I think it is well worth clarifying that FirstPlus is a wholly owned subsidiary of Barclays Bank plc and has a Consumer Credit License issued by the Office of Fair Trading. They are regulated by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) and a member of the Finance and Leasing Association (FLA). As full members, they are bound by the FLA Lending Code.

It’s worth remembering what moneysupermarket.com does. We try to help consumers find the right product for them by making markets transparent. We endeavour to list all the products in a market and provide tools, information and guides to enable consumers to save money and make wise choices. From time to time, because of our size, we are also able to negotiate exclusive products or prices for our customers – better than you could get if you went direct to the provider, for example. FirstPlus was one of a number of authorised secured loan providers to feature on this site and a significant number of customers benefited for some time from the exclusive lower-rate provided through moneysupermarket.com – an offer highlighted by Tim Moss in the YouTube video from two years ago.

Since that time the market has changed considerably – the financial crisis has pushed funding costs up for lenders and seen them pull back from lending – especially in “riskier” product areas such as secured loans. It’s worth saying, that even in the core mortgage market, mortgage rates are now completely disconnected from the Bank Base Rate. Mortgage rates are now higher than they were, despite the fact that the Base Rate has fallen by 5% points to 0.5%. Falling house prices have compounded the problem for 2nd-charge lenders as they are more at risk than the main mortgage lender. In fact, there is now virtually no secured loans market – and First Plus was just one of the high profile closures.

The provision of a secured loan is agreed directly between the lender and customer under strict guidelines and terms and conditions. Most secured loan rates are variable and the unprecedented (and continuing) economic crisis we have been experiencing for some time now has meant that a number of providers – and consumers – have had to adapt. Clearly, if you feel that the terms and conditions are unfair or are being abused then the first thing to do is to complain directly to the company and, if that route has been exhausted, then to the Financial Ombudsman.

Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) is a valuable product for some people – as long as it was sold appropriately, priced fairly, and people are aware of the level of cover and the terms and conditions. At a time of rising unemployment, PPI companies have seen a rising number of claims as people make use of their policies. However, as I’m sure you’re aware, the FSA has recently asked for 185,000 PPI cases to be re-investigated for mis-selling. moneysupermarket.com fully supports this decision along with the proposed complaints handling procedure. We are glad the FLA is working with both the FSA and providers to ensure the complaints procedure is fair and workable for both customers and companies.

Of course, it goes without saying that moneysupermarket.com takes its responsibility to customers extremely seriously. That’s why we do our utmost to show the most comprehensive range of products and to negotiate exclusive deals for our customers where appropriate. We’re fully regulated by the FSA and have always strongly recommended that independent professional advice is obtained before you purchase any product and/or service.

We also provide a wide range of informative articles, guides, videos, webcasts, podcasts and expert and customer reviews to help our customers make an informed decision. Indeed, the key purpose of this community forum is to enable our customers to talk with each other, ask questions and provide product and provider insight in order to assist as much as possible in making that informed decision.

Finally, regarding posting links on the community forum, we do ask as part of our Community Standards that links to alternative forums aren’t posted – for the simple fact that it doesn’t help our members to see how (or if) their particular problem was resolved. Those members have come here for a reason and it makes sense to keep that particular question and answer conversation contained so that others can see how to deal with a similar issue. I don't think that's an unreasonable request.

As always, our Customer Services team is on hand to help and you can contact them on 0845 345 5708 or by emailing customerservices @ moneysupermarket.com (remove the spaces around the @ symbol). Alternatively, if you’d like to email me directly, I’d be happy to help if I can.

Thanks again for all your comments and feedback – much appreciated.

Yes, all you had to do was admit that in the beginning.

What you should have done is contacted them in confidentiality asking for an explanation first, as is normally the case before accusing anyone....did you in fact try that first.???

I accepted that i should have stated it was 2 yrs old but that does not excuse or exonerate.

I even changed the tense of the original post.

Think we'll leave it at that as i've made my point, which i believe to be a valid one, but you refute. All about opinions.

The rest was just irrational waffle, ....except for the video which was inaccurate as you now accept.

I'll concede on one point, i should have pointed out that the vid was 2 yrs old. Other than that every comment of mine is accurate.

Legal action? That'll be fun.

1) Because you tried to give people a false impression, by not informing anyone that video was over Two years old.

2) That needs taking up with admin, nothing whatsoever to do with me. !

3) Time for your bed again..is it.?

Yes, best let sleeping dogs lay - No doubt MS will likely issue you a more informative reply tomorrow, as you should have initially contacted MS in privacy to give them a chance to respond. Publicly accusing without being able to substantiate your allegation could leave you personally open to legal action.

1) Why is it misleading - can't see that one. MSM did champion these loans and they did receive huge commissions for doing so. The lovely lady saying "6.2%" wow what a rate, this is exclusive to MSE. As has been said the broker had a fudiciary duty, and i hold broker responsible for their part.

2) i have posted a link to the FirstPlus Complaints site on numerous occasions. Each time it has been removed. And yes each time it was relevant to a discussion o First Plus Interest rates. Maybe only a select few can post links - lol.

3) This doesn't warrant a reply.

As we've all kissed and made up i will not stoke the fires again.

All peace and harmony but suspect that wont last long, or maybe we are in for a miracle.

Something like a broker or introducer actually having the balls to say we got it wrong on the sale of these polices, we see that now, we recognise we have a fiduciary duty of care to our customers in regard to the sale of loans, that we owe them the utmost good faith in the sale of insurance, that this duty is ongoing and we are now going to come clean with everything we know about these loans because this duty is on going.
We know that BFP have a gagging clause on us doing this, but we now recognise that this clause is a clause to commit fraud, we shall no longer be bound by it, yes there will be a price we have to pay but it is now unconscionable to duck our responsibilities in this matter, it is our duty to the customer and fulfilling that will bring its own rewards in the end

gg - Thanks for your calmer response which makes perfect sense, I have never-ever and never will stand up for Firstplus or that X old boot off CH4 Countdown who endorsed them. Neither do I think MS are totally innocent or exonerated in all of this under the circumstances... however I do believe if there had been any knowledge about their activities at the time, that MS would have distanced themselves from FP.

Neither do I believe this forum to be in any way, shape or form ..my exclusive territory, it is here for the benefit of all to air their views out in the open and hopefully for the truth to become apparent..what has always angered me though is for a individual or an organisation to stand unfairly accused without the full facts also being disclosed in support of that allegation. That was my sole reason for responding to the originator Halifax, because those safeguards were not present in his protestation, otherwise I probably wouldn't have even given this thread a second look let alone a reply.

MS will more than likely reply to this thread during admin hours, until then it is totally unfair to accuse anyone of any intended wrong doing. I reiterate my stance, I hate innocent people being duped or deceived by these Sharks and usually more often than not stand up to defend the small guy in the street, as is evident by my numerous posts made helping people to overcome debt....however people also have to take precautions themselves, the best precaution you could take with FP was not to get involved at all.

Remember the old saying, prevention is better than cure...it's certainly the case with these Sharks..

Been a good debate though.!

Conmankiller, ok, I'll be reasonable. Of course I have listened to you. What you say (time and time again) is this:

Blame yourself, blame Firstplus, but DONT bame MSM.

What I am saying in ALL my posts, is this:

Yes I blame myself, yes I blame Firstplus, and no I do not blame MSM (it is a business, not a charity)

BUT I think MSM should be fair and accept criticism for having endorsed, in the past, a company that has turned out to be no more than a loan shark. So, like PPIUK says in his posts, MSM has a share in the responsability with which they have conducted their business. I am sure they did not MEAN to send us all to a loan shark, but since their business is to endorse good financial products to customers, they should at least recognise they made a gigantic mistake, just like we should, and are.

Yes I admit I have been deeply irritated by your responses, which can be summarised in the predictable "you signed on the dotted line, mate", and which contains a triumphant element of moral highround. Like I said, you are siding with the playground bully and that's fine, that's your prerogative. But you cannot simply say "shut up" to people who think differently than you (and with very good cause which you sympathise with yourself - see FPShafted post).

I think this is what made me flip. I became snotty in response to YOUR snottiness. I think you rushed to defend what you perceive as your territory and again that's fine by me. We'll just have to agree to disagree, and that's all. No hard feelings. I think that this tit for tat serves no purpose so I apologise for my part in it, and fully stand by all my posts, as well as Halifax's initial one, and the explanations given by PPIUK and FPShafted.

CMK

I blame the lady that used to do the Maths on the CH4 Countdown programme. With her high level of intellect, she should have known that the sums did not add up, when she agreed to appear in adverts for First Plus.

I can't name her,but I think she should hang her head in shame.

Huckster

Halifax71:

As this site doesn't allow links just go to YouTube and search First Plus exclusive secured loan rate

MoneySupermarket should hang their heads in shame.

Ahh - Halifax ...The originator - Further justification, okay.

1) Video is dated 7th June, 2007 therefore misleading, have you had a look.. if so do you agree.?

2) This site does allow links, if you look around there are many links in various posts including this post. !

3) It should be you who hangs your head in shame not MS, for placing yourself in this vulnerable position in the first place, and without taking trhe appropriate actions to get yourself out, if the agreement has been illegally altered since you signed the acceptance.

I'm back - still standing by my comment.

As i said last night CMK - show me an inaccuracy in my "rant" and i will apologise.

gg - If you stop being personal and try absorb what I am saying, I do sympathise and agree Firstplus are crap, but that is where the blame should rest with FP themselves...not MS.

If you are to blame MS for you being in a disadvantaged position, then you should equally blame yourself for putting YOU there.!

Nope... you are right, that's not the spirit of the forum.

(Me snotty??? Oh dear, oh dear ...:) Apologies for trying ... I admit defeat!... I don't think anyone can beat YOU on that score!).