Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi. Yes, to do this properly you should send a Letter of Claim and give them two weeks to sort things out. Be ready to file the claim on MCOL on Day 15. The experts should be along soon with further advice. HB
    • I sold, as a sole trader, two trays to a customer for £370. Arranged delivery through P2G with Evri who lost the parcel. I am going to make a claim against P2G in the small claims court but not sure if I have to send them a Letter of Claim first? Any advice gratefully received.
    • A little reminder of what the water crims are charging us to do       With the untreated sewage discharged into our waterways there is not just excrement - but all the diseases associated with diarrhea and sickness
    • Morning all, a while since I've been here....I contacted my bank regarding the matter and they took the decision to take "charge back" action against QVC, I initially got the money back and then letters from QVC basically stating I had defaulted on my payments and owed them the money Nationwide had claimed back, just as BF speculated they would. In short I repaid QVC to avoid having debt collectors after me, and having contacted CAB am now in the process of writing to Evri outlining my claim. CAB provided me with a basic template for the letter so I'll see how that goes. Regards.
    • Well you could say that you have pictures where the signs were not on the wall where you parked so would require strict proof of when they were erected . But in any case it was dark so even if a sign was there you didn't see as it was not illuminated. Little point in not having signs that can be seen at night though it obviously makes it easier to issue PCNs and pursue motorists claiming they have breached non contractual contracts whilst breaching those same motorist's GDPR.
  • 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

CPP and CAP1


gerson
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3745 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,

 

I sent a Claim to CAP1 regarding PPI and CPP. They have upheld the PPI but have totally ignored the CPP.

 

According to the Information available so far, I should have received a letter by now but this has not happened.

 

How best should Progress this...

 

CPP began in April 2003 (after cancelling PPI) until finally cancelled in March 2006

 

Thanks

 

G

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 4 weeks later...

As you approached Cap1 themselves and they are offering redress the it seems that the CPP scheme will not be applicable.

 

That being the case I would have thought that the similar rules to PPI redress should come into play so that any associated contractual interest should be paid together with 8% if the removal of the CPP puts the account into credit.

 

Have you done any calculations as to the amount you feel you ought to be getting back?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...