Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi. Could you post up what they've sent please so we can see what the charge is? Cover up your name and address and their reference number. HB
    • I've looked through all our old NPE threads, and as far as we know they have never had the bottle to do court. There are no guarantees of course, but when it comes to put or shut up they definitely tend towards shut up. How about something like -   Dear Jonathan and Julie, Re: PCN no.XXXXX cheers for your Letter Before Claim.  I rolled around on the floor in laughter at the idea that you actually expected me to take this tripe seriously and cough up. I'll write to you not some uninterested third party, thanks all the same, because you have are the ones trying to threaten me about this non-existent "debt". Go and look up Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd, saddos.  Oh, while you're at it, go and look up your Subject Access Request obligations - we all know how you ballsed that up way back in January to March. Dear, dear, dear - you couldn't resist adding your £70 Unicorn Food Tax, you greedy gets.  Judges don't like these made-up charges, do they? You can either drop this foolishness now or get a hell of a hammering in court.  Both are fine with me.  Summer is coming up and I would love a holiday at your expense after claiming an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g). I look forward to your deafening silence.   That should show them you're not afraid of them and draw their attention to their having legal problems of their own with the SAR.  If they have any sense they'll crawl back under their stone and leave you in peace.  Over the next couple of days invest in a 2nd class stamp (all they are worth) and get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.
    • Yes that looks fine. It is to the point. I think somewhere in the that the you might want to point out that your parcel had been delivered but clearly had been opened and resealed and the contents had been stolen
    • Hi All, I just got in from work and received a letter dated 24 April 2024. "We've sent you a Single Justice Procedure notice because you have been charged with an offence, on the Transport for London Network." "You need to tell us whether you are guilty or not guilty. This is called making your plea."
    • Okay please go through the disclosure very carefully. I suggest that you use the technique broadly in line with the advice we give on preparing your court bundle. You want to know what is there – but also very importantly you want to know what is not there. For instance, the email that they said they sent you before responding to the SAR – did you see that? Is there any trace of of the phone call that you made to the woman who didn't know anything about SAR's? On what basis was the £50 sent to you? Was it unilateral or did they offer it and you accepted it on some condition? When did they send you this £50 cheque? Have you banked it? Also, I think that we need to start understanding what you have lost here. Have you lost any money – and if so how much? Send the SAR to your bank as advised above
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Insurance send wrong replacement phone and say Tough Luck


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5387 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

My daughter bought a Nokia 5800 8Gb from phones 4 U about 8 weeks ago. She took out the insurance and 3 weeks ago she was assaulted and the phone was smashed up.

 

She contacted the insurance company who required her to send in the remains of the phone and supply a crime reference number, which she did.

 

When the new phone arrived it was the wrong colour but worse than this it did not contain the 8Gb of memory the old one had. When she phoned them yesterday they told her she had gotten all she was getting and as far as they are concerned that is the end of the story.

 

What I need is some help composing a letter to the insurance company (as you can tell from this post I am not good at getting things down in writing). I guess it needs to rely on some legal issues, but I'm not sure which ones. This was a New phone picked for its colour and for the capacity of music it could hold. The replacement will not hold two tracks and therefore defeats the object completely.

 

Any comments/help would be appreciated.

 

Regards

Andy

The Grand essentials of happiness are: something to do, something to love, and something to hope for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Insurance company

 

I took out insurance *on date* in good faith to cover the Nokia 5800 8Gb bought from phones 4 U *on date*

 

To this end I would expect that you being a reputable company would honour your commitment to replace the phone to the same or better specifications of the insured item.

 

On claiming against this insurance you specifically asked for the old phone and a police incident number to be sent to you. This request was complied with *On Date*.

 

Imagine my disgust to find that the replacement handset was of a lesser specification than that which was insured.

 

I have require you to replace the old handset with a similar like for like handset within the next 14 days. failure to comply means I will have no alternative than to report you and your company to Trading Standards; The Financial Ombudsman and lastly to Phones 4U, who recommended you to me - Take out if not the case.

 

I hope that common sense prevails and you honour the agreement we entered into, also take note that when contacted by phone *on Date* the person who dealt with this query stated, and I quote "she had gotten all she was getting and as far as they are concerned that is the end of the story" - Very professional!!

 

I await your response

 

bigandy

Edited by PGH7447
Link to post
Share on other sites

from their policy cover

 

Replacement phones and accessories will come from available stock (which may be refurbished). If the same model is not

available, the replacement will be of a similar specification and quality, which will be determined by us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, reply sent via email in the first instance. I will let you know how it goes.

 

Regards

Bigandy

The Grand essentials of happiness are: something to do, something to love, and something to hope for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm amazed they can put in a comment such as "will be determined by us" in there - doesn;t seem that it can be contractually binding. The general reason for this sort of thing is that if you have an old model that is no longer made then it allows the insurer to get the closest match (which is fair enough) - not to decide to just skimp on the specs to what they can be bothered to give out (which is outrageous).

 

 

Interested to see what they have to say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...