Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Next Directory PPI


Baz1994
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1968 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

First I would send SAR's for both Next and Phoenix if you have not all information.

 

Then submit a PPI complaint to Next who will respond that they were not responsible but it will get things in motion to escalate your complaint with FOS regarding Underwriters responsibility.

 

I am sure others will add to the above but good luck and don't give up as it took mine nearly three years to be eventually settled.

 

Thanks for the advice. It's worth a go I guess!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi Baz,

I am not sure about Phoenix, and why they got clobbered but l can only think it was on the basis that they automatically added the PPI to accounts.

Cups

 

Thanks cups.

 

I have asked FOS for an explanation as I have a similar situation on another complaint but they seem to be not applying same stance.

 

I will keep forum posted.

 

Cheers

 

Baz

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

This has all come as a big surprise to me.

 

 

I felt sure I had PPI on my Next Directory account from 1988 until I cancelled it around 1994,

the account is still active.

 

 

I sent a SAR to Next six months ago,

and it came back with transaction histories from 2000 and no copy of the original agreement

which I had specifically requested, just a generic copy.

 

I wrote back with a failed SAR letter and a very pleasant lady telephoned me at home

and said there was definitely no PPI added when it was opened.

 

 

I said how can you be sure unless you can see the original agreement

and she said they did not need to because there would be notes about insurance on my account,

so I accepted this and thanked her for getting back to me.

 

What should I do now?

I've got the account number but no proof of PPI

Link to post
Share on other sites

if you paid PPI or whatever

it will be listed each month on the statement

what categories appear each month

on those years you think you paid it?

 

 

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

Thank you, I am aware PPI or whatever would have been listed on a monthly statement, unfortunately as I said in my post, I do not have any transactions histories prior 2000 which is the reason I tried to obtain a copy of the agreement. The failed SAR didn't produce any results so when I came across this thread it opened up other possibilities.

 

 

It seems every customer with a Next Directory account in the 1980's and 90's had PPI from the outset and I hoped someone on here with a similar experience might be able to advise me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, I am aware PPI or whatever would have been listed on a monthly statement, unfortunately as I said in my post, I do not have any transactions histories prior 2000 which is the reason I tried to obtain a copy of the agreement. The failed SAR didn't produce any results so when I came across this thread it opened up other possibilities.

 

 

It seems every customer with a Next Directory account in the 1980's and 90's had PPI from the outset and I hoped someone on here with a similar experience might be able to advise me.

 

Hi rosequeen,

 

Mine was from 1991 but I was lucky enough to have old statements proving insurance payments.

 

Did you not receive a statement of account with your SAR ?

 

I requested and received what looked like a computer orientated screen print with ppi total, claim totals etc for the whole account. Maybe go back and ask for further details :wink:

 

Keep forum posted. G/L

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Baz1994, the only records I received from Next were transaction lists from 2000, none from when the account was opened in 1988, and a sample of a credit agreement. My account is still in use but I've got no proof that I paid PPI, although I remember having the insurance until 1994. What can I do?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Baz1994, the only records I received from Next were transaction lists from 2000, none from when the account was opened in 1988, and a sample of a credit agreement. My account is still in use but I've got no proof that I paid PPI, although I remember having the insurance until 1994. What can I do?

 

Well the transaction list that I received actually stated total insurance amount paid from 1991 to date. It also included other payment / interest totals to date so I trust that is what you received otherwise I would be asking Next for further details. It was headed 'Account Enquiry' sheet under my Next Account number.

 

I also sent an SAR to First Assist who were the policy administrators in which I also received policy wording details.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone

 

 

I know I definitely had PPI on my account and also remember phoning them years ago to query the PPI on my statements which was automatically added. Unfortunately I do not have any statements only a letter dated 12 December 201 1regarding the T&Cs which reads.

 

 

"Also as part of these changes we have decided to close the Next Directory Flexible Account Payment Protection Plan (PPP, the Plan). Therefore, as Appointed Representative, and with the agreement of FirstAssist Insurance Services Limited on behalf of the Insurer, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Plan, we are required to give all members of the Plan at least 90 days notice that the scheme will close on 31 March 2012. The last date we will charge you for cover is 31 December 2011, although cover will remain in place until 31 March 2012, when the Plan will close".

 

 

I can't remember what year I opened my account. If I write to Phoenix do I need to send them a SAR with a £10 cheque or should I contact Next to obtain further information?

 

 

Thanks for any advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

start a new thread

of your own please

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

  • 2 years later...

Thank you cups and Baz1994. I know that this is an old thread but I wanted to thank you both for your persistence.

 

I've just successfully claimed PPI from Next and it was Phoenix Assurance that I dealt with. I'm just waiting for the payment to come through to my bank account.

 

I was just browsing on the PPI forum to read about other Next successes and came across this thread. My thanks to you both is because I see that it was your persistence that helped establish:

 

1. Who claimants needed to contact to get redress

2. The PPI reclaims process for Next

 

Of the claims that I have done so far, I found this one to be the easiest. I made my complaint via Resolver about 4 weeks ago, was contacted by Phoenix within 2 weeks and received my offer two days ago.

 

Hope you're both well and got some good use out of your award!

My threads

deedee1310 v Abbey, deedee1310 v Capital One, deedee1310 v Halifax Plc, CapQuest CCJ, deedee1310 v Littlewoods & deedee1310 v Smile

If I have been of help in even the smallest way, please click the star and "add to my reputation" :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you cups and Baz1994. I know that this is an old thread but I wanted to thank you both for your persistence.

 

I've just successfully claimed PPI from Next and it was Phoenix Assurance that I dealt with. I'm just waiting for the payment to come through to my bank account.

 

I was just browsing on the PPI forum to read about other Next successes and came across this thread. My thanks to you both is because I see that it was your persistence that helped establish:

 

1. Who claimants needed to contact to get redress

2. The PPI reclaims process for Next

 

Of the claims that I have done so far, I found this one to be the easiest. I made my complaint via Resolver about 4 weeks ago, was contacted by Phoenix within 2 weeks and received my offer two days ago.

 

Hope you're both well and got some good use out of your award!

 

Oh brilliant deedee1310 and well done, glad to have been of some help.

 

Hopefully will receive funds in time for Christmas.

 

ATB Baz

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...