Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Why ask for advice if you think it's too complex for the forum members to understand? You'd be better engaging a lawyer. Make sure he has understood all the implications. Stick with his advice. If it doesn't conform to your preconceived opinion then pause and consider whether maybe he's right.
    • The Barclay Card conditions is complete. There was only 3 pages. This had old address on. Full CCA. 15 pages. The only personal info is my name and address. Current Address The rest just like a generic document.  Barclays CCA 260424.pdf
    • An update to this case as I’ve not been on in a while.    I am still awaiting a charging decision in the case. The two police officers involved have said their personal belief is a section 47 ABH charge is the most likely outcome but this isn’t a sure thing of course.    The EA certificate from the issuing court has now lapsed. The court have refused to recertify him until they’ve had a hearing in to the case, and the district judge has issued orders to surrender all evidence, footage, photos etc.    I have done so promptly.    the EA, not so much . Equita have claimed they cannot provide his bodycam footage as the camera he was wearing is the EA personal one not one of theirs.   the EA has claimed he has asked Equita and the police for the footage as he claims he doesn’t have it.    the police have confirmed they didn’t seize his camera and they don’t have it.    so they are basically pointing the finger at each other all the while failing to comply with the district judges order to provide all evidence they intend to rely on at the rescheduled hearing.    The district judge has stated the hearing for his certification will NOT be the hearing for my complaint as there is no charge as of yet, and just as to whether he should be recertified or not.    I’m not 100% on why that can’t be done at the time, but I’m not about to question a judge…..      
    • Thanks FTMDave, I like the cut of your jib - I'll go with that and obtain proof of postage. Encouraging that NPE have never followed through and seem to blowing hot air, let's see where they go after this   Regards
  • 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 
        • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Miss-sold PPI to HM Forces


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4170 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

Hello,

 

I stumbled across this forum while I was looking for information on a potential PPI claim, so thought it would be a good place to seek some advice.

 

I have seen on a few websites for PPI claim companies, that if you were a member of HM Forces and sold PPI, then this was miss-sold, due to the fact that members of the Forces are covered for death/injury etc due to being in the military and that there is no way that PPI would ever pay out. I find this believable, but because it is spread all over websites claiming to want to help me (for a fee of course) I would like an impartial opinion.

 

I have started the process of reclaiming PPI by phoning Lloyds TSB, and have received a confirmation letter that they are investigating. After doing a credit check I thought I had two eligible claims, but the bank have listed quite a few more product references on their letter.

 

Before I start planning my Vegas holiday, could anybody suggest from experience what the chances are that my application should be successful?

 

 

Many thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

100%

 

have a read of link no.1. below

 

and welcome aboard

 

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

Seconded! A PPI reclaim for services personnel should be a slam dunk!

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies.

 

I was fairly sure that I would have a strong case, but you have given me some confidence in pursuing my claim.

 

I have now received two letters from Lloyds TSB, one for various loans that I had over the years, and one dealing with my credit card (on which I cancelled the PPI some time ago after realising that I was paying a lot of money for nothing). However, I have a slight concern with the contents of the letters...

 

When I phoned the Lloyds TSB help line, everything seemed very quick and easy, but I fear that it was maybe too quick. The reasons given for my claim are:

 

1. For the loans ' You were not eligible for the PPI'

2. For the credit card 'You were not eligible (Over 18, UK Resident, Permanent Employment > 16 hrs per week).

 

I was expecting to have to fill some forms in to explain my reasons, but this is all that I have received with the letter saying that they will get back in touch with me within 8 weeks. If this is the case, then I am happy to allow the clock to tick, but it seems that there is no mention that my employment at the time was with the RAF. Can I rely on L/TSB to check my employment during the time that I had the loans, or should I somehow try to prompt them with this information.

 

I did try phoning them yesterday, but the guy on the end of the phone seemed adamant that they had all of the information that they needed (although we did have slight problems understanding each other) and that I should now do nothing. Is this true, or should I be somehow giving them as much information to help them come to the correct decision.

 

Any advice will be much appreciated.

 

Regards

 

TB

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...