Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Post #9 suggested some options to avoid or put off having a smart meter. Post #12 a simple solution to your complaint about the ay they handle fixed monthly DD. It's not really clear why you posted if you're going get irate when members "jump in" with suggestions. You can see what I'm referring to on "gasracker.uk" to allay your suspicion that I was lying in Post #16 which was made to correct ther misinformation shown in your Post #15
    • Back to octopus from the smart meter/tariff salesperson. Octopus have now said just ignore the letter - I dont have to have one despite there letter implying (at least) it was required, but that i will HAVE to have a smart meter if current meters stop working as 'their suppliers dont supply non smart meters any more'. They also say they do not/will not disable any smart functionality when they fit a smart meter I am of course going to challenge that. Thats their choice of meter fitter/supplier problem not mine
    • Point taken that we should inform new Caggers that the £20 option is there in wrong registration cases.  Well, supposedly there, who knows what the PPCs would do in practice.  Anyway, the option is allegedly there with both the BPA as you say, but also the IPC (I've just checked). However, there's a danger here of baby, bathwater. The two easiest types of cases to win are (a) residential - due to Supremacy of Contract and (b) wrong registration - due to "de minimis".  Indeed until recently we has been boasting that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing. We simply can do nothing about a terrible judge.  The judge seems - I say seems because we haven't had all the details - to have ignored "de minimis",. got fixated on a sign and awarded unreasonable behaviour costs.  A totally bizarre judgement.
    • You mean your witness statement 
    • That may be your personal claimed experience I said i didn't want smart meters - you jumped in to recommend smart meters I quite clearly indicated I was happy with being in credit to maintain constant payments - you suggest paying what I owe every month I quite clearly indicated I was happy with being in credit to maintain constant payments - you suggest a variable tariff - even if its one that only varies on a daily basis rather than half/hourly - with prices higher in winter when you need it and lowest in summer when you need it least   politeness ends with: - I'm NOT interested in any smart tariff I see, You are pushing your smart meter + variable tariffs in the wrong place - try pushing them somewhere 'nearer to home'  
  • 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

me and CPP reclaim


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3523 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

An interesting topic for me as I just read this in the CAG mailshot.

 

As most people do,

I skim these mailings "in case" there is something interesting/useful then move on to more pressing emails

like the usual spam for increasing the size of my manhoo... erm bank account.

 

 

This one surprised me as I've been a subscriber of Experian's Credit Expert for quite a while now.

 

 

Like many people, I rarely read the T&Cs of a reputable(?) company when I agree to a *FREE* trial

and I provided my credit card details as requested (over SSL - remember, they're reputable) to allow them to confirm

and subsequently charge for their credit checking service, if I wanted to continue after the free trial.

 

 

Since then, my old credit card has expired and I've renewed my details using my Debit card as I found their service quite useful

- checking my credit status, confirming my details were correct etc.

 

All of the above is a prelim to my questions (2 off - bear with me).

 

I don't recall seeing anything about their supposed ID protection when I signed up to the free trial (quite a few years ago now),

maybe this didn't exist then?

 

 

Perhaps like most, it was in the T&Cs and I simply checked the "Yeah whatever" button?.

 

After a couple of years of using their service,

I started receiving emails from them saying my online exposure was fine -

My thoughts were "Thanks Experian, didn't expect this

- Nice to see my money is being invested,

I thought I was paying to see what the lenders had access to but now I see you're providing me with a pseudo real-time service".

 

After another year or 2, my bank sent me a text saying my account was overdrawn.

 

Strange... I phoned my bank, my identity had been stolen and someone had attempted 2 transfers totalling around £2000 to other (unknown) accounts.

 

My bank were very quick to refund the money (same day so no charges were incurred)

and apart from signing a pre-printed letter they sent to say I did not know the intended recipient(s),

the matter was resolved (from my perspective).

 

Now, my 2 questions are this... (*phew* - Told you to bear with me)....

 

1. If I received emails telling me my online profile is safe/good etc

(BTW - They also have me listed as Rating 999 - A safe credit risk).

How was it that my bank account was hacked [i forgot to mention, the ID theft also involved blocking access to my online login]?

 

 

I'm extremely careful when I use my bank card and I never give personal details to unauthorised persons

- Damn, I even help stop the [s-p-a-m]mers (CAG renames "s.p.a.m" [no dots] to "problem")

on the phone and a lot more behind the scenes.

 

 

2. If I had insurance

- Wouldn't I have used it in this circumstance (had I known about it)?

Or would it even have have been covered since my bank (god bless them) dealt with it entirely?

 

 

So am I potentially owed a: a refund of insurance money as the service was not provided or b: compensation for my identity being stolen>

 

Maybe I should put in a claim to refund the payments I've apparently made for this service,

that I never knew existed or I had paid for.

 

 

I'm truly dismayed that PIP (essentially this is what they have [mis]sold - Insurance I didn't ask for,

tagged on to my monthly payments without me realising)

exists outside the banking industry but I suppose given the close relationship,

I should be surprised.

Edited by Dragonlaird
Link to post
Share on other sites

time to reclaim then

 

 

get it in quick

 

 

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

own thread created

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...