Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Problems with Confused.com


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5922 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Has anyone else had problems with Confused.com?

 

They claim to make car insurance easier but both times I've used it it's just caused utter confusion because the best quote isn't as cheap as it claims.

 

Last year it claimed Adrian Flux was the cheapest but they proceeded to ask for an extra £100 after taking out the policy. I refused and expected a full refund but was chaged £50fee + 10 days insurance cover about £85 in total and to make matters worse the free phone number I was ringing was redirected to 0845 and they made money out of me that way too!

 

This year the same thing seems to be happening again. Two days ago (21Jan07)Postoffice/Zurich is quoted as the cheapest, so this time my wife rang them to make sure it was right. But we discovered 15 mins later that they have sold us the wrong policy. Consued.com said Zurich but they seem to have signed us up to Norwich Union which doesn't cover manufacturers optional extras.

 

Even though they hadn't taken the money they said they couldn't cancel it until we sent the policy back "even though it hasn't been issued yet it's in the system" they said! So I'm going to be without insurance and unable to drive my car because they seem unable to stop it even though it was their mistake and doesn't come into force until tomorrow 24th Jan 08. I tried to take out insurace again but it won't let me keeps saying im a cutomer of the postoffice! I rang the Postoffice yesterday and they said they could only sort it if I paid an extra £30!

 

Obviously I'm mad as hell, and wondering how common this practice is because to me it seems like a [problem] to get the customer with a low quote, take their money then bump up the cost and customer can't leave coz they will get a £50 fine.

 

We've agreed with the postoffice to cancel and re-order and they promised a full refund and no fees or charges. But after what happened last year I'm sceptical as I was given similar promises.

 

This time I've kept all the evidence of my confused.com quote and if they try to charge me £85 again I'm gona take them to the small claims court for breach of contract because we agreed to buy Zurich insurance and got sold something else!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds familiar. I took out the Post Office car insurance through Confused.com and moved house, they wanted an additional £100 on a policy valued at £180 since they claimed I had moved to a higher risk area. I checked the premium difference through confused.com and the new adress premium actually came out CHEAPER!

 

I made a complaint to the PO and they told me to go away so I am making a complaint to the FOS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The main problem with using sites such as Confused and Moneysupermarket etc is that consumers often think the price quoted is what they will pay. The site itself uses a number of assumptions that when you go direct to the company it may be a completely different price. I tend to avoid these sites as they can be misleading and often end with situations such as these.

They cover themselves by stating that the price "may" be different when completing the quote from the direct insurer.

Halifax + BOS

  • £1300 WON from Halifax
  • £713 WON from BOS

Have I helped? tip the scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely the price should be exactly the same if the information supplied both to the comparison site and the insurance company is the same?:confused:

 

The comparison site asks some generic questions, and each insurer asks different questions, so the information used to obtain a quote won't necessarily be accurate.

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you are correct barracad, confused.com search generic providers based on key information then when you select one you are directed to the actual providers site and answer more specific questions. In my case the price differences were higher since I was offered things like legal cover and no claims protection.

 

The PO seem to have got themselves in a mess since they tried to claim that my move was a higher risk but a subsequent search and quote from them (for the new address) showed it to be actually less. Chancers!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but I always thought contract law works like this..

 

Business makes an offer to treat (an advert)

 

Buyer accepts the offer to treat and makes an offer to buy

 

Business can then either accept the offer to buy (by taking payment) or make a revised off to treat (because the advert was in error).

 

Taking payment is acceptance of the offer as it stands, and is legaly binding to both parties from that point. If they want further details or their offer is in error they must not take any payment!

 

The seller has 30 days to provide the goods or service then they are in breach of contract. I can then reorder the goods/service elsewhere and the original seller who broke the contract has to pay the price difference + any consequential loss.

 

I'm not a lawyer, so don't take my statement as gospel, but that is my understanding of contract law and the sale of goods and services act.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but I always thought contract law works like this..

 

Business makes an offer to treat (an advert)

 

Buyer accepts the offer to treat and makes an offer to buy

 

Business can then either accept the offer to buy (by taking payment) or make a revised off to treat (because the advert was in error).

 

Taking payment is acceptance of the offer as it stands, and is legaly binding to both parties from that point. If they want further details or their offer is in error they must not take any payment!

 

The seller has 30 days to provide the goods or service then they are in breach of contract. I can then reorder the goods/service elsewhere and the original seller who broke the contract has to pay the price difference + any consequential loss.

 

I'm not a lawyer, so don't take my statement as gospel, but that is my understanding of contract law and the sale of goods and services act.

 

See Post#4. Confused.com are providing a "quote" which is subject to the provider agreeing so their "offer" is subject to verification by the actual provider of the service.

 

There is a level of further detail the provider requests and the final contractual quote is based on this, at this point there is an offer and contract.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever they should not take payment until both parties are agreed on what is on offer.

 

Your statutory rights cannot be affected no mater what crazy terms a business thinks is legal. Such things come under the Unfair Contract Terms Act.

 

Never mind the fact I phoned them too to confirm the price!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever they should not take payment until both parties are agreed on what is on offer.

 

Your statutory rights cannot be affected no mater what crazy terms a business thinks is legal. Such things come under the Unfair Contract Terms Act.

 

Never mind the fact I phoned them too to confirm the price!

 

****

 

The contract you speak of would be with the insurer and not confused as (as far as i am aware!!) they have no licence to sell insurance and merely offer a price comparison and direction to the insurers site (they make money out of referrals) Either way as per distance selling regulations (covering both internet and phone) you do have a cooling off period ranging from 14 days up to 30 days with some companies in which you are entitled to cancel the insurance without penalty so long as no claims have been made and are entitled to a full refund.

Halifax + BOS

  • £1300 WON from Halifax
  • £713 WON from BOS

Have I helped? tip the scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

To further show how incompetent insurance companies are I've just had a letter from my old insurer Budget who say 'As we haven't heard from you, your insurance policy has not renewed and all cover has now ceased'.

 

Well lucky they didn't try to renew it becuase THEY DID HEAR FROM ME! I called their customer services 3 weeks earlier and wasted half an hour trying to convince somone in India I didn't want to renew!

 

Why does getting car insurance have to be this stressful every year :rolleyes:

 

My problems are twofold, my car has a manufacturers sports option (fitted at purchace) and one of the drivers is unemployed at the moment. There are not many insurers who will quote because of the sports pack. Price comparission sites keep offering Zurich through other front names but they don't want to know if your not in employment. I even phone up to confirm with a human but often I'm speaking to India and they don't understand or don't care and then I end up with insurance I cannot use. It's so infuriating as we have 7 & 10 years no claims you'd think we're a safe bet to insure!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just came across this interesting quote from the Gardian

 

"It took nearly 15 minutes to complete all the questions on Confused. ' It's a pain in the backside,' concedes a spokesman, 'But by answering all the questions in detail, we are able to generate real-time, fully-underwritten quotes with individual prices for each policyholder. The prices you see on the website are real, not estimates or assumptions. It's our responsibility to accurately convey and compare policies the best way we can.' "

Driven round the bend by website cover | Money | The Guardian

 

could be useful if i have to take it though the courts :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the Post office wrote to me today saying I haven't returned the cover note (which I did last week in the envelope they supplied!) so my problems are still ongoing to get a full refund.

 

I have given up on them to sort these issues out and re-insure so looked around for a new insurer. I have managed to find Performance Direct / Highway who say they don't charge optional extras as modifications so looks good in theory.

 

It was about the 10th insurer down on confused.coms quote list. I can't believe the previous 9 were all fronting Zurich which won't cover the information I gave! Confused.com has big issues and they have change diddly squat even though they have been missquoting like this for over a year!

Link to post
Share on other sites

And guess what... i got all this problems with kwik-fit, all because of i bought it thro confused and simply it did not ask enough info or info was not passed properly to kwik-fit therefore my insurance is hanging in uncertainty!!

 

No more confused.com.... you really give me more than what i bargain for: A confused+distress+and ANGRY customer!!!:x:x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Post Office Insurance have issued a full refund. Hats off to them for not trying to screw me for a cancillation fee unlike Adrian Flux did last year :/

 

If you want a descent insurer Perfomance Direct / Highway seem okay for cars with optional extras so far as i can tell. However again, some of the information I gave on the confused.com screen wasn't passed along the chain.

 

So be careful if you use an online quote comparison site because that's the 3/3 times it's happened!

Link to post
Share on other sites

However again, some of the information I gave on the confused.com screen wasn't passed along the chain.

 

So be careful if you use an online quote comparison site because that's the 3/3 times it's happened!

 

sang33ta, you moan like crazy about confused.com, yet you still use them and again you moan. Don't you ever learn....:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sang33ta, request a copy of your proposal forms from confused, this is screenshots of your answers to the qquestions asked, if they dont provide, you could always SAR.

AB123uk

 

IF MY COMMENTS ARE USEFUL, PLEASE CLICK MY SCALES!

 

Halifax Staff Current Account WON

Lloyds WON

Yorkshire WON

Halifax Staff Visa WON

 

 

If CAG Helped you..... Why not help CAG!

Click Donate at the top of the forum!

Oyster- I fought the Lloyds will have it's mark in history- have you downloaded your Official Charges Track?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this year I was ready and took screenshots of everything. I'm sure it must have helped get a refund in full when I showed them "this is the contract you offered!"

 

I moan about Confised.com because I like it in principle, only entering my details once, but in practice they really need to fix how it works becuase it's leaving people unknowingly under-insured. Maybe if I moan enough somone will listen this year. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...