Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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
      • 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

RBS charge on house


kieran3032
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6398 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'm new on here, so please forgive me for any mistakes I may make.

I can't find a similar problem to mine, so that's why I am starting a new thread.

It's a long story, but in simplified terms, this is what has happened.

My mum had a loan with the R.B.S. My brothers and I were paying it on her behalf for a few years as it was secured on the family home, and she had since emigrated.

Sometime in 2001 my mum got a refund cheque back from the R.B.S. for approx £300 (I will look for the paperwork soon). I cease to make payments as I assume that the loan is paid.

 

There has been NO correspondence in the following years.

Fast forward to 2003. In the proccess of buying my mum's house from her their is a charge on it for approx £7600 the solicitors for the R.B.S say that it has to be paid before the transfer can take place. My mum lets it come out of the money due to her to let the sale complete.

I phone the R.B.S on my mums behalf, they say that as far as their records can see, it was paid off in 2001 like I said. They ask me where the witheld £7600 was sent. I phone THEIR solicitors they are not doing anything apart from trotting off well worn stock answers.

When I get anywhere, the person I have been dealing with inevitably leaves the company, goes on holiday e.t.c and I'm asked to send photocopies of all the paperwork yet again.

I get really stressed dealing with it and leave it for months at a time because I get frustrated with situation and need to get on wth life.

Anyway, the last letter I received from the Solicitors said:

 

26th April 2006

 

Dear Mr xxxxx

 

The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc

 

We write further to your recent call to these offices and copies of correspondence sent to us.

 

We have now had the oppurunity of reviewing our file and the copy correspondence sent ot us. Although a refund may have been made to your mother(Mrs xxxx) in September 2001, from the statements we hold on this file this refund should have never been made as at that time the liability had not been repaid in full.

 

Our clients hold no information to suggest that the liability was fully repaid in or around 2001. The schedule of payments we hold on file suggests that at he period in question, substantial sums remained outstanding.

 

We trust the above satisfies matters. However if you have further queries please do not hesitate to contact us.

 

Yours faithfully

 

xxxx

 

 

Hope this is making sense for anyone with the patience to read it:o

 

I am not saying that they are wrong, but what do I do next? The solicitors ambiguous "substancial sums remained outstanding " :confused:does not instill a lot of confidence, surely they know EXACTLY how much was owed. Is it normal to owe so much money and not have the lender ask for it back after previously paying it every month for years?

 

I would be grateful for any help in this matter.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds a bit strange to me.

It seems like the RBS and their solicitors are both saying two different things.

 

I think what I would do would be to send of a Subject Access Request, and get past statements from the bank for the loan. At least with these in hand you'll know for sure that you have paid off the loan or what there is left to pay.

Once you know that for sure, you can continue from there. It's certainly not like the RBS to not chase money owed to them (after one missed payment, never mind a couple of years).

01/08/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - S.A.R sent

24/08/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - Statements Received

31/08/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - 1st Request sent

13/09/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - LBA sent

23/09/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - Offer received £1544 (Thanks but no thanks)

02/10/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - *WON* Full settlement

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...