Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Mariana v NatWest - **WON**


Mariana
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6459 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 all! I just had a good result on the action against Halifax.

 

While that was all happening, I opened a Natwest step account. Had a letter from NatWest yesterday informing me that a charge of £39 has been applied due to a failed DD!!!!! Well, well, well - I am amazed!

 

First of all, I deposited £1200 cash into the account that day. Secondly, when I checked the online statement the dd was shown as paid! Below is an abstract of the letter I posted and faxed to them today ...

 

Thank you for your letter of 15th June 2006. We note your comments therein.

We are writing to ask you to refund to us this charge incurred due to the fail direct debit which you have levied from our account on 15th June 2006.

As you know, this is a new account and we are in the process of setting up our various direct debits. You will note from your records that a CASH deposit of £1,200.00 was made on 15th June 2006. We did check our balance, and at approximately 14:00, 15th June 2006, when the direct debit to Powergen showed as being paid together with the account being in credit by £1,200.00! We can only assume that your system is automated. A reasonable bank employee would have noticed this and acted accordingly. Furthermore, we were informed by Powergen that the direct debit would be effected from July 2006, and were therefore unaware of the direct debit for June 2006.

We feel your behaviour harsh and your actions are not justified in so far as your charge being disproportioned to the action you preformed. Additionally it has now been confirmed that particularly high level of penalties are considered to be unfair per se by the Office of Fair Trading who reported on the 5th April 2006 and are therefore presumed to be unlawful in the absence of specific proof to the contrary.

 

Furthermore, the regime of fees which you apply to accounts in relation to direct debit refusals are unlawful at Common Law, Statute and recent Consumer regulations. If you say that they are not then will you please demonstrate this by letting us have a full breakdown of your costs incurred as a result of this breach in order to reassure us that your penalties really do reflect your costs? ....

This is a complete let down by NatWest who I thought would be a step up from those Halifax *&%$!!!

Will keep you informed ....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nyah...NatWest don't show it as bounced until the day after it's supposed to go through. It's really stupid. You can go to check and see if it's come out, see it marked as having gone out and your balance changing accordingly, and then find the next day that it's suddenly switched to having "failed," and your balance having dropped by £38 accordingly...

 

I think it was marked on Moneysavingexpert that NatWest are actually the worst for charges.

DPA Letter received by NatWest 11/04/2006

DPA Request expires 21/05/2006

Statements received 15/05/2006

LBA sent 15/05/2006

 

If you find me vaguely coherent, click the scales.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes me so angry! The worst is that I paid in CASH together with a banker's draft. The Manager (!) who was helping out on the desk that day, took it as one transaction. When he finished, I asked him when the banker's draft would be cleared - (wait for it ...) 5 working days (and ....) the deposit will not show for 2 working days! (that is for the cash AND the banker's draft!!!) He then asked if I want the cash to show today ..... HELLLOOOO!!!! YES!!!!

 

Wonder who has the benefit of the interest for the time it takes them to show that cash has been paid in ....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah. A friend of mine had something similar happen. He paid in some cash and a cheque.They classed it as one transaction, so the cash (which needed to be in the account for the next day) also took 3+ days to clear, leaving him getting charged for something.

 

As this is the first charge, just call them up and ask for it back, politely, namedropping the website when you do. Hopefully, they'll just cough up and that'll be the end of things.

DPA Letter received by NatWest 11/04/2006

DPA Request expires 21/05/2006

Statements received 15/05/2006

LBA sent 15/05/2006

 

If you find me vaguely coherent, click the scales.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks! However, have already faxed and posted letter just before lunch ... I am so p'ed off with banks that I do not want to beg and grovel - I'v done that for far too long. Will let you know what the outcome is ... Thanks again for the info and insight ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a complete let down by NatWest who I thought would be a step up from those Halifax

 

:grin: Dont make me laugh I nearly spilt my coffee!

 

Y

Credit Cards

Barclaycard -WON! Amex - WON! MBNA (x2) - WON!

Mint - WON! Monument - WON! Morgan Stanley - WON!

Egg - WON! Halifax - WON! Sainsbury's Bank - WON!

Citi Cards -WON!

 

Banks

 

08/06/06 Claim against NatWest started.

01/11/06 Case Closed :)

 

08/06/06 Claim against Halifax started

24/08/06 Case closed :)

 

 

Visit my forum: http://www.planet-watch.org/forum

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update - received letter from NatWest - usual blah blah blah - however they agreed to refund the charge of £38, if I sign away any rights I might have in the future regarding charges. How lovely of them to want me to sign away THAT right! I know it is only a small amout, but it is the principle!

 

I will write back saying thank you, but no thanks. I am not signing anything and will follow the proper procudure ...

 

Keep you posted....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest NATTIE

That's unusual that the wording states that. normally a first charge can be waived as a Gesture of Goodwill. As for the cash and bankers draft. It is the case that cash on it own is straight in the account, however cash and cheques do show the following day because the cheque has to be sent to a processing centre because cheques are not processed on site. The computer screens that the cashiers used is really a big calculator to work out how much cash the teller has taken for balancing purposes. Fraud in relation to Banker's draft is a lot more common than you think which is why the cheque takes 5 working days to clear. From reading other threads, this is farily standard across banks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Update...

 

Had a call from Birmingham Collections centre last week and spoke to a very confused lady. She could not understand why on earth I did not want to accept their offer. After I explained to her that I did not want to sign away any right I might have in future to dipute charges she went away to confirm with her manager. I then received a very irritating letter from Natwest on Saturday explaining the usual blah blah blah charges are correct and fair, we do not agree with the OFT's findings, sorry that we could not resolve this matter blah blah blah .. anyways- it would seem that proceedings via MCOL are pencilled in for Wednesday ... All this for a measly £39 - it is the principle more that anything else ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mariana,

 

Talk about out of the frying pan and into the fire! Over the past 14 years I have banked with just about every high street bank (both business and personal), Natwest have by far been the worst ones!! My girlfriend is currently persuing £3900 from them, most of which is £39 charges for less than £10 over her limit and, like you, bringing the account back into her limit on the same day as it went over.

 

Furthermore, she has been paying £10 a month for the 'privaledge' of having this wonderful account that pays less than 1% interest for credit and charges over 19% for debit!

 

I have just convinced her to open an Alliance and Leicester account which offers 0% overdraft, 10% on savings, 4% on credit, NO account fee AND they pay you £25 if you are recommended by a friend. You can also earn yourself £25 for every person you recommend and there's no limit to it.

 

A&L are apparently quite bad at issuing charges too but we all know what to do about that now, don't we!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, believe me - I will fight every charge they put on my accout hands and nails - but obviously, doing everything now to avoid it in the first place. It goes without saying that having had our monies back from Halifax and not being in the red for most of the month does actually help!!!!

 

Good luck - I will follow your progress with interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry did you say someything about MCOL and Wednesday?

Whats that about? They are going to court to try and get charges allowed?

George Loveless - “We raise the watchword, liberty. We will, we will, we will be free!"

 

My advice is only my opinion, I am not a legal expert.

 

IF YOU LIKE THE ADVICE I'M GIVING AND ARE HAPPY WITH IT, CLICK THE SCALES ON THE BOTTOM LEFT OF THIS POST AND TELL ME.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am due to issue court proceedings through Moneyclaim online (instead of making an application at the court itself). If you are unfamiliar with the step, I would suggest that you read the Frequently Asked Questions and Step-by-Step guide.

 

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is interesting .... checked Moneyclaim and NatWest has entered a defence - 2 days after the claim has been issued ... is this normal for Natwest?

 

Can't really see that they will send in the lawyers to defend a £38 pound claim? ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest NATTIE

Mariana-am quite gobsmacked that NW would defend what amounts to £38. To be perfectly honest you would have got it back quicker by going into the bank on Day 2 speaking to the manager and stating that he didn't tell you it was being returned on the same day you were paying in. As a new account he couldd have refunded the whole amount as a GOGW. Hindsight by me re-reading the thread. I'm sure this will be settled very quickly

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, well, well. Was not too worried about it last night. Got a knock on the door this morning from my friendly post lady to sign for a special delivery. Turned out to be a letter from RBOS with a letter stating it is not commercially in their interest to defend this claim. They enclosed their cheque with a note that they are not accepting liability. Excellent!

 

Thank you natweststaffmember for the information. I did just as you suggested and got no-where with them. Anyways, it just goes to show that the system and procedures that Bankfodder and Dave have put in place works a treat everytime!

 

Thanks everyone.

 

Note for MODs - survey completed and will donate again when Halifax claim is settled.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations!!

 

That is brilliant news!

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

Congratulations!

 

Is it just me? Or is there a hint of irony in the above!!

 

Well done Mariana - and well done NatwestStaffMember - for being a good sport!!

HALIFAX - Settled in FULL - £1654 13/6/2006

NatWest - Prelim sent - £985 16/6/2006: LBA sent 30/6/2006 : Summary Cause issued (Sheriff Court) on 14th July : Waiting for Cobbets!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...