Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
  • 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
      • 160 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

RBS Additions packages mis sold.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3211 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

Hey there,

 

 

i had this account sold to me 4 years ago.

I hadn't opened a bank account in the UK for some years.

I was not presented with a possibility of a free account at any time in the meeting.

 

 

I have never once used any of the packages or so called perks.

 

 

I complained to RBS they through it out, stating, "having previously lived in the UK i should have known that free accounts were possible to attain".

I didn't.

 

 

I then moved onto the Ombudsman, who have sided with the bank.

 

 

How can I take this further, it is simply not fair!

 

Any advice appreciated.

Thx

Link to post
Share on other sites

There has been a lot of mis-selling of packaged accounts.

 

The main basis for reclaiming refunds on these account fees is that the package was sold on the basis of elements which were not suitable or not applicable.

 

An example of this might be household contents insurance when you are already insured for telephone insurance when you don't have a telephone et cetera.

 

I think that you need to let us know what the features of the RBS package were and then we can see if there is any way of moving you forward.

 

RBS are a nasty and dishonest bank and of course they have made a lot of money from packaged accounts – just like the others.

 

What exactly has the ombudsman said?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ombusman via a phone call, basically just upheld the decision. Looked at the 'facts', which were actually opinions. I got a bit upset with him, because essentially he is siding with the bank, which therefore means I am telling lies. It's outrageous. They are sending written confirmation, when it arrives, I will post it. Can't recall the exact details of the package I was being offered. Bottom line is that I wasn't offered an alternative, and took this because i believed it to be the cheapest per month. I was naive, but I 100% was not informed of a free account.

thx for getting back so promptly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then start off by sending an SAR to RBS and get all of the details.

You can't possibly complain about it if you don't know what you are complaining about. It is not surprising that the FOS is supporting RBS. It sounds as if you didn't present your complaint very effectively

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you mind if I posted a copy of the exact letter of complaint? You may be right, but i honestly believe the Ombudsman is trying to shift a backlog, and is not investigating thoroughly. Appreciate you responding.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there, i received the letter from the Ombudsman, would you mind if i uploaded it for your perusal. It is filled with so many suppositions, inaccuracies, and just factually incorrect statements. I really would like to appeal this. Just wondered if you had the time? Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the decision from an Ombudsman or an adjudicator?

 

If a first tier adjudicator you have the right to refuse to accept, present any further facts and ask for an ombudsman to review your complaint

 

Please post up your complaint and the FOS reply

 

Have you requested the SAR yet?

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Is the decision from an Ombudsman or an adjudicator?

 

If a first tier adjudicator you have the right to refuse to accept, present any further facts and ask for an ombudsman to review your complaint

 

Please post up your complaint and the FOS reply

 

Have you requested the SAR yet?

Hi there, not sure what the SAR would achieve. The basic disagreement is that I wasn't offered an alternative (free from fees) account. I was in full knowledge of what they were selling me, they just didn't offer alternative, and i believed this is all they had on offer. Anyway I attach the letter sent from Ombudsman.
Link to post
Share on other sites

The SAR narrative would have been very useful, as to how you opened and used the acc

 

You need to put forward salient effective reasons why the insurances were of no suitability

 

or you were already covered etc

 

Then ask for complaint to be passed to an ombudsman

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The SAR narrative would have been very useful, as to how you opened and used the acc

 

You need to put forward salient effective reasons why the insurances were of no suitability

 

or you were already covered etc

 

Then ask for complaint to be passed to an ombudsman

It's already gone through to the ombudsman, and the reply is attached above. My gripe is that a lot of what the Ombudsman has 'guessed' is simply not factual. Let me recheck the SAR, not sure you get another crack at this. My legitimate complaint is that i wasn't presented with a free account option, but it seems that I am not being believed on this one. thx
Link to post
Share on other sites

your letter was from an ADJUDICATOR, so presumably then you have asked for your complaint to be reviewed by AN OMBUDSMAN

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you are saying since that letter was written you have already had the final written decision from an ombudsman?

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you are saying since that letter was written you have already had the final written decision from an ombudsman?
You've lost me mate...the letter i attached was from the ombudsman or ADJUDICATOR (no idea why you put that in full caps, but i'll join in). The question i was asking in my first post, being unhappy with with i regard is an unfair ruling, can i take it further? Thanks.
Link to post
Share on other sites

The adjudicator is only the first tier, before June 2 you had the right to refer his decision, and give extra facts, to an Ombudsman

 

for review ( ombudsman then makes the final decision)

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The adjudicator is only the first tier, before June 2 you had the right to refer his decision, and give extra facts, to an Ombudsman

 

for review ( ombudsman then makes the final decision)

I didn't have time to do it before June 2, plus i think the fact that I waited around 6 months to even get that, I should be allowed a bit more time to retort. But i guess, and perhaps I haven't asked this clearly enough: can anyone offer advice as to the substance to which my further complaint can be heard properly, because so far, it seems to me that I would just be going back with the same facts, and disputing some of the adjudicator's retorts, some of which are just inaccurate? Thanks.
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...