Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. 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. Can a PPC (claimant) 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.   
    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
  • 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
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4525 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

Hi,

 

Wonder if anyone can help me. I sent a ppi claim form to Santander who have now taken over Debenham store cards, in July and received their so called 'final' response on Saturday. I was making my misselling claim on the grounds that I had a previous illness which I now know I would never have been covered for.

 

Here is an extract:( I haven't scanned the doc yet so have to type out)

 

"I can confirm Account cover insurance was set up on your account on 15th March 2001 after a discussion that took place on the telephone with our telemarketing department... The policy applied to your account was Account Cover Insurance and comprised of price, purchase and payment protection. Our telemarketing department sold this policy to you and one of our advisers explained the main features of the product and price. The insurance was added to your account because you chose to do so. However you had an opportunity to change your mind as once you decided to take the product a policy summary and policy document was mailed to you for your review... I understand that you believe that Account Cover Insurance does not cover you as you had a pre existing medical condition at the time of opening. However, please understand that having an illness prior to the cover being taken out does not exclude you from the insurance; this simply may mean that you cannot claim for this condition in the future...I can confirm that Account Cover Insurance was cancelled on 26 August 2011..."

 

I am perplexed as I cannot remember the detail of such a conversation with a telesales person since it was so long ago. Do you think this is what seems to me to be tactics to fob me off? They did not provide me with any other evidence such as signed agreements to the effect that I wanted the ppi. Can I request copies of the agreements and take this to the FOS? I have so many questions I want to ask them based on this response.

 

I would really appreciate some guidance as to what to do next. Thanks in advance!

JS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Some of these institutions use the "telephone" conversation ploy to fob you off.

 

If it were me I would send a Subject Access Request (SAR) to Santander. There is a template SAR in teh CAG library, the link to which is at the top of every CAG page in green. This should yield ALL the inormation they hold on you, iincluding statements/transaction history. There is a fee payable of £10 and they will have 40 days to comply. Make sure you put emphasis on the fact that you want ALL information they hold.

 

Let's see if they put a transcript of that phone call in the package but if not you can still take this claim forward.

 

From the information that comes back you can prepare a schedule of claim to quantify your claim.

 

Have a look at the PDF files on the fos website if you haven't already done so.

 

You can then either pass it to fos or you can sue in court.

 

Do the SAR first though.

 

Regards

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jade

 

Welcome to CAG

 

The guys will be happy to advise as soon as they are available.

 

What you need to do is send them a SAR Request with a Postal Order for £10, send it Recorded. They have 40 days to respond. If you think anything is missing send them a chase letter. Once you've got all the Data they hold on your account you can ask the right questions.

 

SAR Template in the library on this site.

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/ppi/guide-to-PPI-forms.html

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/ppi-credit-card-insurance

Also info in 2 and 3 in my signature.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am about to do a SAR to Santander re my debenhams (as well as a few other cards I had with them-ge capital who they bought out seem to have done almost every store card on the high street lol). But I remember getting a card in the store, the staff member rushed through the personal details and did the application for me then told me where to sign. I believe it is likely PPI was on and reckon this was added by the sales assistant at the time I certainly never had any calls from them-until I fell behind on payments.

I doubt the call ever took place, will watch your thread as we are at the same point. Good Luck

ali x

Btw I am no expert just give notes based on what I have read on here and other forums/sites, plus my own experiences and investigations.

 

All ccj's now dropped off file, 2 yrs to go to clear file.

All old debts either settled or made unenforcable.

 

RBS MPP-Full offer at 8 wks from first complaint

RBS Overdraft loanguard-full offer at 8 wks from complaint

Citicard ppi-with FOS finally paid 8 months after offer through FOS!

Capital one x2- with FOS

Monument ppi-with FOS

aqua x2 ppi-partialled settled still pushing for the rest

Black horse ppi-offers made and accepted except for one early loan they say no info held-still pushing for payment

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Everyone,

 

Thank you so much for all your responses, your advice is much appreciated. I had a feeling that it was a ploy since the tone of the letter was very contradictory in parts. I know the call never took place because I remember the application being done in the store, now I've had time to think about it. Anyway, I will look at the documents suggested and continue my claim. I am just so angry with the way the banks have been ripping us off for years. I am determined to succeed and a least get something back from my ppi claim, not just from Santander but from others like Audi ( they've said I never had PPI when I have all the documents to say that I had ppi, for one of two cars I bought from them - that's another story but no doubt the same applies). Will keep you posted.

 

A tremendous thank you!

JS

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi Again,

 

It seems like a while since I was here. So here is an update. I sent off the SAR to Santander after my previous post and I am still waiting to see if they include a transcript of my alleged phone conversation with them requesting the ppi. I also sent the SAR to Audi who had previously refused my PPI claim saying I did not have ppi with them. It was an odd thing since I managed to find all the paperwork, account numbers etc. Anyway, I have received all their documents and find that I did have PPI with them after all. I'm not not so sure how to reply to them. I would appreciate being pointed in the right direction.Will I need to resubmit my claim form to them?

 

I also sent a claim to MBNA whose Virgin credit card I applied for online. Although it was about five years ago I remember that the application kept crashing and would not untick the ppi. I phoned their technical support at the time and spoke to someone about the fact that the form kept crashing. It was about two weeks before I got the card but forgot to raise the issue again about the ppi. Since I have started the claim process with them they have subsequently sent me a copy of the online form simply saying I requested it. I only received this at the weekend so haven't had time to respond to it yet. Yet another to get me all fired up.

 

Thanks again in advance for your help!

-JS-

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Hi,

 

Been in hospital for a while since last post. Have had final response from Santander re Debenhams ppi. Taken to the Ombudsman. However, since card was taken out before Santander took over, I need to find out who the original underwriters were in 2001. Does anyone know how or where I can find this information? I have absolutely no paperwork from that period. Thanks!

 

-JS-

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

I am quite a way ahead of you in claiming back ppi on a Debenhams store card and these people are proving the hardest to deal with. My card was taken out in 1994, rushed application, crosses put by salesperson where I had to fill in, no ppi requested. Apparently I took out the insurance during a telephone conversation - no transcript available (no surprise there!!).

 

Anyway to the subject of underwriter, mine was Financial Insurance Group (Genworth Financial) and the fos are pursuing them, a long drawn out process due to the legalities and the fos have a number of cases and are considering a test case in the first instance.

 

The address for Genworth is:

PO Box 140

Building 11

Chiswick Park

Chiswick High Road

London W4 5QX

Tel: 0500 055 6548 (number for Senior Associate, Consumer Affairs)

 

If Santander dont produce the insurance document, you could ring Genworth (even if Santander do, I would ring them anyway as the policy document differs from the one Santander sent me!) I spoke to a nice lady there who was very helpful, I should have asked if she had details of premiums paid as Santander cant (or wont) supply them back as far as 1994. Thats another thing to put on my to do list!!

 

Hope this info has been helpful, have a read through my thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?202232-Ge-Money-(debenhams)-Ppi

This will show you my battle so far with them. Any other questions, please ask, I am more than willing to help in any way I can

GE MONEY - DEBENHAMS CARD

Settled in full after prelim :)

 

MBNA

Settled after LBA

however mistake made by me on contractual interest so going after the rest now

SETTLED IN FULL JAN 2007:)

 

MINT

Offer after prelim rejected

Settled in full after LBA:)

 

to go:

Barclays Bus Ac - to mcol

Barclays CC - to mcol

Nat West (over 6 years) no action taken yet

Creation Financial - awaiting statements since Dec

Goldfish - offer after prelim rejected

and some more

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Thank you very much for your responses. I am on the mend but quite weary from all of the nonsense being dealt out by the banks over ppi. I am still determined to get back what I am owed. I have sent the SAR and the questionnaire to Santander and have received their final response. Have taken it to the FOS who have told me that Santander cannot give me a final response because they didn't own Debenhams in 2001 as it was GE money when I took out the card. This is why I am looking for the underwriters. Once I have this I need to pass it onto the FOS.

 

Tink660, thanks for the contact address as I am sure they are the ones I need to to confirm , so I will call them tomorrow to find out if they were the underwriters for mine. like you Santader also told me that I requested the ppi via their telesales dept, no transcript produced with the SARs. As you suggest I will read your threads also.

 

Will keep you posted!:-)

 

-JS-

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Again,

 

Been looking through my SARs info sent by Santander and I notice they have sent me someone else's credit application. Plus the account notes etc are from 2005 and not from 2001 when I took out the card. They have also sent the Santander current agreement T&C and not the original GE Money. Do you think I should bother contacting them again about this or just leave it to the FOS? Like I said earlier they say this is their final decision.

 

Thanks again

-JS-

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I am a liitle further on than you with my claim which is now with the underwriter. After I contacted FOS , they advised that I send the questionnaire to the underwriter, who hasn't responded yet.

I rang Santander and asked who the underwriter was and they gave me the name and address, which is the same one on the policy.

They are Financial Insurance Co Ltd , but I believe they are also known as Genworth. My cards were taken out in 2000 and 2001 ( HOF)

Have a look at my thread - sorry I still haven''t managed to work out how to put the link in.

Also there will probably be more than one reason to claim misselling than the one you raised with Santander , have a read around the FSA guidlines there is a whole list.

Good luck

W

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...