Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Santander/MBNA/Alliance & Leicester Credit Card PPI and no evidence


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2588 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

Evening all,

 

I'm after some advice and please forgive me if this has already been answered. I'm using my mobile and it's not too easy to navigate/search on here to see and it's been many years since I last posted on here so I'm a bit out of touch with processes/etiquette.

 

I've received a letter from Santander relating to a PPI claim that I opened quite some time ago and didn't proceed with. I was told at the time that there is no records relating to my account because of its age.

 

The credit card was taken out with Alliance & Leicester very early 2000 and was taken over by MBNA in March 2003. I had a few cards, the repayments were gEttington to the stage where I had little left over after paying the minimum amounts on all of them and then ended up living on credit at the limit but was still able to pay the monthly payments. Then the company I worked for at the time closed down over night owing me a months wage and missed payments. I found work but not soon enough for the late payment charges and interest to escalate. I then entered a debt repayment program with Baines and Ernst chipping away at approx £16k of debt.

 

I had PPI cover on all my cards (and loan) because I was foolish enough to think I would be protected. When I was out of work I tried to initiate the cover but was told that because I wasn't on JSA I didn't qualify (the amount of time I was out of work and then back in employment wasn't worth signing on but did mean I had to wait two months before any money from employment came in).

 

They all told me this about having to sign on JSA and didn't want to quit my new job so hence the repayment program.

 

So today, this letter states that they still hold no evidence but "have recently undertaken a further review of our process and guidlines, and this means we are now able to calculate an assumption redress offer".

 

Their offer is £48.89!

 

I'll have to have a hunt for a statement or any mention of th card balance, but that offer does seem very unfair considering A&L were one of my biggest creditors (£4k plus) and we're one of the most brutal when it came to Debt Collection.

 

This is how they've calculated it

 

A: Full refund of PPI payments: £25.08

B: Interest paid by you on the above: £0.56

C: Lost interest on cash unavailable to date: £29.06

D: Income Tax Deducted @ 20% = 20% x C: £5.81

E: Net interest paid to you = C-D: £23.25

F: Net offer to be paid to you = A+B + E : £48.89

 

Any advice on what steps I should take would be extremely appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

id be sending them an sar.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Similar thing happened with my Santander PPI complaint. I was originally told that it wasn't a valid Santander card, and when I tried again two years later they found a copy of the credit agreement and one PPI premium that I paid just before the account was closed. I couldn't find any old credit card statements, only copies of all the direct debits I had paid when the card was being used, so Santander made an offer based on my average spend.

 

 

I had to accept it because a DSAR produced no new evidence, however mine was a lot further back than your complaint so it might help in your case, ask them for either copy statements or a full list of all your transactions. Best of luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...