Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx for your feedback. That is the reason I posted my opinion, because I am trying to learn more and this is one of the ways to learn, by posting my opinions and if I am incorrect then being advised of the reasons I am incorrect. I am not sure if you have educated me on the points in my post that would be incorrect. However, you are correct on one point, I shall refrain from posting on any other thread other than my own going forward and if you think my post here is unhelpful, misleading or in any other way inappropriate, then please do feel obliged to delete it but educate me on the reason why. To help my learning process, it would be helpful to know what I got wrong other than it goes against established advice considering the outcome of a recent court case on this topic that seemed to suggest it was dismissed due to an appeal not being made at the first stage. Thank-you.   EDIT:  Just to be clear, I am not intending to go against established advice by suggesting that appeals should ALWAYS be made, just my thoughts on the particular case of paying for parking and entering an incorrect VRN. Should this ever happen to me, I will make an appeal at the first stage to avoid any problems that may occur at a later stage. Although, any individual in a similar position should decide for themselves what they think is an appropriate course of action. Also, I continue to be grateful for any advice you give on my own particular case.  
    • you can have your humble opinion.... You are very new to all this private parking speculative invoice game you have very quickly taken it upon yourself to be all over this forum, now to the extent of moving away from your initial thread with your own issue that you knew little about handling to littering the forum and posting on numerous established and existing threads, where advice has already been given or a conclusion has already resulted, with your theories conclusions and observations which of course are very welcomed. BUT... in some instances, like this one...you dont quite match the advice that the forum and it's members have gathered over a very long consensual period given in a tried and trusted consistent mannered thoughtful approach. one could even call it forum hi-jacking and that is becoming somewhat worrying . dx
    • Yeah, sorry, that's what I meant .... I said DCBL because I was reading a few threads about them discontinuing claims and getting spanked in court! Meant  YOU  Highview !!!  🖕 The more I read this forum and the more I engage with it's incredible users, the more I learn and the more my knowledge expands. If my case gets to court, the Judge will dismiss it after I utter my first sentence, and you DCBL and Highview don't even know why .... OMG! .... So excited to get to court!
    • Yep, I read that and thought about trying to find out what the consideration and grace period is at Riverside but not sure I can. I know they say "You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is"  but I doubt they would disclose it to the public, maybe I should have asked in my CPR 31.14 letter? Yes, I think I can get rid of 5 minutes. I am also going to include a point about BPA CoP: 13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place. I think that is Deception .... They giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other! One other point to note, the more I read, the more I study, the more proficient I feel I am becoming in this area. Make no mistake DBCL if you are reading this, when I win in court, if I have the grounds to make any claims against you, such as breach of GDPR, I shall be doing so.
  • 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

Mortgage interest rate rises


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3596 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

There is notification Santander 'intend' to raise the int rate by half percent. The reason it is 'being considered' is because of 'the increased cost to Santander of raising the money which we lend to our customers, including what it costs us to provide you with your mortgage(what ever that is)' apparently those reasons in the mortgage conditions. Nothing mentioned about savers rates so I presume there's no connection there:madgrin: I just feel the BOE rate is low for a reason. How much can these lenders raise the int rate until someone decides to do something about it. I can hear the arguments from the hard line who say tough bananas but it doesn't have to be this way, I hear business economists are getting fraught over Government decisions.

 

Anyone else with an int rate rise from other lenders?

Edited by determindator
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Santander is a F**ked bank.

 

Santander does not get money for mortgages from saver's deposits (although look up fractional reserve banking). A mortgage contract with a bank magically borrows the funds into existence, so it should be win win.

 

However, Santander is a Spanish bank, & anyone who has looked at property in Spain knew that it was overvalued years ago, & is still mightily overvalued now. There are a colossal number of empty buildings in Spain, & the banks still really hold these assets, which technically will become their liability as the money advanced to the constructors will not be recouped by their sale.

 

Money market rates for Santander, & Spain in general, to stay afloat with all the new disclosures & capital requirements are therefore higher as they are more at risk of going bust.

 

I saw more blatant corruption at all levels in one hour trying to do a deal in Spain 6 years ago, & walking away from it, than I ever have in the UK. The Abogados (lawyers), Mayors, vendors, you name it. We're not in a good way in the UK, but I'll tell you now that the balance sheets of Spain & its financial companies are just a cheery fiction.

 

10 years ago, the only people who had a variable mortgage rate 4.25% above base like Santander were lowlife lenders like Kensington who dealt with the riskier bets. My mortgage is 1% above base. Most SVRs are 3.5% above. That's so they can still pay out the £13 billion the banks still pay annually in bonuses I guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Thanks for reply TFL. Well first month to pay int rate hike. So Santander, I will find another mortgage lender. I can already feel the benefit from just saying it:-D

 

They have a 2yr fixed rate for newbies 2.39% I spose I contribute to that as well as the bonuses.

Edited by determindator
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

If borrowing will cost more to banks and building societies in light of the possible lowering of the BOE base rate, whats the odds banks and b/socys will pass the extra cost onto the customers by raising rates? IMO they should absorb the loss as increasing int rates affects the spending power of people, plus people could lose their homes putting more burden on the state. They should have saved up for the rainy day as they knew it would come!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Just a thought, if mortgage borrowers had more in their pockets, this would revive the confidence lost by investors who are holding onto their money because they are nervous no one is spending. More people could afford to buy homes with low int rates which would stimulate the house building industry which in turn creates jobs in many other sectors.

 

As for the unregulated lenders causing havoc with their high int rates, that's something else to address.

Edited by determindator
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
  • 10 months later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...