Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi, I'd change justice centre to county court. I also wouldn't be including a telegraph article in the bundle. It doens't prove anything law and you don't have distribution rights on it. I also wouldn't personally break down the exhibits on the index page, normally people have a seperate page for this right before the exhibits. The main index page normally just says Exhibits to WX of [Your Name] or at least that's the format I use/see people here use, although really it makes minimal difference.   I also see that despite referencing several judgements you haven't included the EVRi one   paragraph 46 really needs to go imo it has nothing to do with anything. Your in court to apply the law to your case, not to tell the judge about a newspaper that means nothing to your claim.   I also see you've adopted the issues in dispute/not in dispute, which is also known as a scott schedule. if you are taking this approach, for things not in dispute I would say this needs to be things that are agreed between parties, not things like "There is no dispute that I am happy to supply all this evidence which is included in the court bundle." I would say that issues in dispute is to focus on the aspects of the claim that are in dispute, such as whether liability is limited by insurance or not, so I'd be changing that accordingly.   BF should be along shortly to advise on things.
    • J, I just numbered them like that; once the witness statement is made, I'll add it to the pages.   The court date has been set as 02 July 2024. Please find attached V6. I will send an unredacted to the email.  claim budle_V6.pdf
    • I'm afraid that I have tried downloading it three times and each time I am getting an error message. Would you mind scanning it again please and uploading it again. I understand that JK has managed to open it but others may not. Thanks
    • I can see that.   In this case, I'd email both that receipt and your tracking label to evri's small claims email and say that is the information you have.   They'll figure it out from there I'm sure
  • 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
      • 160 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

Welcome Finance PPI - Help needed


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2509 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... First time post here,

 

 

after being told a few years ago by welcome finance I didn't have PPI on 2 loans from 2004, a claim company checked again for me and it transpires i do have PPI on both.

 

I don't remember taking PPI out although I was a suggestible 21 year old who wanted a fast loan for a holiday and another for a driving license crash course.

 

I have the credit agreements and can see PPI is clearly listed and listed as "optional",

however as I was working full time,

living at home with mum and dad

and had some money in the bank with very little debts/overheads.

.. was this mis-sold to me?

and if so how should I structure a claim?

 

I am considering using a [removed] for ease of use and I've heard bad press about Welcome, although they were quite helpful and willing to assist with registering a claim when I called them.

 

Any help greatly appreciated... Agreements attached.

 

Thanks for any help

WELCOME CAs.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

ive hidden your attachment as you need to redact things properly not just by crossing thru with a pen.

 

we can see thru it....:lol:

 

follow the upload

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

Eeek,

sorry about that.

I will upload again with info properly blocked out.

Thanks

 

DX,

so as my loan is pre 2011,

I can't claim?

 

 

Welcome seemed quite happy to accept a complaint based on these dates.

 

 

My question is was I mis-sold due to the reasons given?

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

ofcourse you can.

 

but they might well reject it

if they do

time to go after the underwriters.

 

now you need to make sure that CMC is NOT expecting a cut and that you contract with them is cancelled.

 

it might pay you to sar welcome

get all the statements and go from there

 

dx

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

Hi... First time post here,

 

 

after being told a few years ago by welcome finance I didn't have PPI on 2 loans from 2004, a claim company checked again for me and it transpires i do have PPI on both.

 

I don't remember taking PPI out although I was a suggestible 21 year old who wanted a fast loan for a holiday and another for a driving license crash course.

 

I have the credit agreements and can see PPI is clearly listed and listed as "optional",

however as I was working full time,

living at home with mum and dad

and had some money in the bank with very little debts/overheads.

.. was this mis-sold to me?

and if so how should I structure a claim?

 

I am considering using a [removed] for ease of use and I've heard bad press about Welcome, although they were quite helpful and willing to assist with registering a claim when I called them.

 

Any help greatly appreciated... Agreements attached.

 

Thanks for any help

 

They may have said the PPI was 'optional', but in my experience, they made it plain that you'd likely be turned down if you didn't take it.

 

I have claimed PPI from them... you don't need the help of those claims firms... it's very easy to do!

 

TB

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would sar first

 

 

dx

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

I have SAR I have all the docs,

I uploaded them,

it clearly states "optional" payment protection,

should I just stick with product unsuitable?

Or that I wasn't aware of it?

To be fair I just wanted the loan and signed what they put in front of me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...