Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Agree it is not a modification that needs to be disclosed to Insurers as changing the seats has not changed the risk.  
    • Frpm David Frost and Robert Jenrick: 'Conservatives must show we respect the votes in 2016 and 2019 and not give the Opposition the chance to undo the benefits of leaving the EU'   Sweep away the Brexit gloom – or Labour will unravel a huge gain ARCHIVE.PH archived 22 Apr 2024 05:47:50 UTC  
    • Please please help we were miss sold full fibre by EE July 22  Install couldn’t go ahead no equipment sent and no. Survey it was hell  foind out no full fibre in road so we had to go back to cooper no choice we involved. Ceo and they put in a man from customer resolution s  he was vile he told me I had to go to engineers  something very odd about the ex resolution s in bt basically they took my drive up said they Would put ducting in ready for full fibre we have got £ 40 for a hours upon hours phones stress and more told to go to ombudsman  then bill was £35 we called twice told it was that price as they had treated us appalling two weeks later all sky package gets pulled we call again our bill goes to 165 the next two weeks was hell trying to get yo bottom why it’s off our package it was all on in the end I spent a day on the phone  341 mins was the call anyway I got to the bottom it was this resolution man coveting up the other issue another deadlock  to cover it all up  they hide data  ee did so couldn’t get the miss sell in writing I have now only from sept  Basically now we tried getting full fibre and they have found my drive had to be taken up again which has sunk .  The engineer has placed the wrong ducting again under my drive and need s to be taken to again apparently and the pipe sticks up middle of the drive near gate not behind look so odd it’s a big as a drain pipe open to water and it’s below touching the electrical cables to hot tub . I was sent a letter from the ex resolution to say I had stopped the work  I haven’t  it’s so sadistic she covering up for her mate in that team as the orginal install he didn’t check it had been done correctly  I took to Twitter and posted on open reach they ignored me then after 3 calls of two weeks they sent a engineer bt ignored me ceo emails blocked tag on Twitter unanswered then we get someone from twitter send a engineer he written report to say it’s dangerous since we have  had a  letter to say our problem can not be resolved  then a email to say sorry we are leaving and we can’t get into our account Bt will not talk to us ofcom tells us nothing they can do Citzens advice said go to the police  we can’t go back to virgin due so mass issue with them only option is sky  but point is they make out we have canceled we haven’t we have this mess on our drive dangeous work we are in hell  it’s like she covering up for this collegue it’s all very odd I am disabled and they like played mentaly with me open reach say bt resolved the issue no they have not  I recon they have terminated us making our we have  to hide it from mgt  Help it’s hell I don’t sleep we have 29 may we have tried  calling they just ignore me  at first they are so lovely as they say I am then they go to nnamager and say we can’t say anything to you end call  Scared police are rubbish I need help even typing is so painfull  Thankyou  anyone hello be so grateful     
    • There's a thread somewhere about someone sending the baillifs against Wizzair that is quite hilarious. I would love to see someone do the same to Ryanair. Question is, should you be the one to take that role. You are entitled to the £220, if your flight was from the UK. If it was TO the UK I suppose it is more of a grey area... though the airlines I know have been using £220 as standard. Not that surprising for Ryanair, the worst cheapskates in the universe, to go for the lower amount, and if you forward this to the CEO he will probably have a jolly good laugh and give his accountants a verbal bonus. After all he's the one who said and I paraphrase "F*** our customers, they'll fly with us again anyway". While we would all love to see Ryanair get wooped in court again, I have to join my fellow posters in thinking it's not worth the hassle for (hypothetically) £7 and not sure it will expedite the payment either. It's already an achievement that you got them to accept to pay.
    • The US competition watchdog has taken legal action to stop Tapestry's $8.5bn takeover of rival Capri.View the full article
  • 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

£45k loan with Swift [Portfield Loans in 2004] , paid over £100k, still owe more.......


Fudge31212
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2188 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

I took out a loan for £45,000 with Swift in 2004 paid PPI 6,100.

 

Loan was done through portfield loan, Rotherham. The loan and PPI amounted to 51,000.

 

I am still trying to pay this loan off, i have paid over 100,000 been to FCA, FCSC, had lawyers trying to get Swift to write off any better f the debt to no avail.

 

Swift come back and say loan was unregulated. PPI wasn't don't through them but a broker but I was mis sold that 6100 plus all the interest. Does anyone have any idea how I can recoup this money - Swift not interested and neither is anyone else.

 

Any advice? Thanks

Edited by honeybee13
Paras.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh???

 

So you took out a £6,100 loan, which ended up being £51,000? And to date you have paid in excess of £100,000??

 

Makes absolutely no sense to me sorry?

 

How much was the loan for?

 

What was the APR or interest rate?

 

Were you working at the time you took out the loan?

 

Were you miss sold the PPI?

 

Why are you still paying them anything?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

PPI reclaim thru the fscs as the broker is bust?

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

Eh???

 

So you took out a £6,100 loan, which ended up being £51,000? And to date you have paid in excess of £100,000??

 

Makes absolutely no sense to me sorry?

 

How much was the loan for?

 

What was the APR or interest rate?

 

Were you working at the time you took out the loan?

 

Were you miss sold the PPI?

 

Why are you still paying them anything?

 

No I have not made it clear loan was for 45,000 in 2004 plus 6100ppii, my husband took not well fell into arrears, when interest rate fell they increased my payments. My husband still not well to,work

Wrote to Swift explaining I had paid in excess of 99,000 not interested - said they could reduce payments but this was not touching the balance outstandingly. Sought legal advice, Martin Lewis etc to no avail. PPI plus interest charged on 6100 would clear balance.

 

PPI reclaim thru the fscs as the broker is bust?

 

I tried that - they rejected the claim. Saying that it was about 2 years ago and things have changed since then. Do you think I should try again?

 

The FSCS said they couldn't help as the loan was unregulated at that time. I have all paperwork, it's like banging your head against a brick wall. How do they get away with this? Why isn't the Gov doing something about Swift and their practice?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish you luck Fudge,

I feel there are a load more of you on Swifts books

they just don't know it because they haven't got to the end of their loan yet.

 

The sheer lack of info supplied by Swift over the years allows all the charges and interest to accrue before you have a chance to nip it in the bud.

 

Because of the capital/interest repayment schedule very little is coming off of the capital at the beginning so any charges placed then stop the repayment being any use and once you end up owing more than you borrowed it is a slow downward spiral.

 

The cynical amongst us would say that this is there overall plan, they certainly understand how little help the victims receive from the law and regulators.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been in contact with legal dept at Swift,

had a lawyer looking at their dealing,

 

been to my local MSP to bring this up in Parliament,

written to Martin Lewis all to no avail or help,

 

as this was unregulated - sold to me through Broker who is no longer trading.

 

FSCS won't repay PPI charges as loan unregulated and taken out in 2004.

Swift eventually came up with no more interest or fees to be added to account but still owe them 10,000, each I am paying off every month.

 

If I got PPI back with interest this would clear The balance.

I did not think I have anywhere else to go who can help.

 

Any suggestions much appreciated.

 

I have all my paperwork back to 2004.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi yes I have tried the insurance company too,

 

I had a lengthy talk with FSCS today told me that there was no where to go as the loan was taken out in 2004 July which was not regulated.

 

In Jan 2005 new laws were enforced re loans and insurance, but I am not covered.

 

Tracked down Director Mark Stringer who worked for Portfield Loans,

when shares a building with Norton Finance which he is a Director, but there seems no where else to go.

 

I think I will just have to give up on PPI.

 

As for the loan with Swift - they don't care.

My husband is very ill with the behaviour from Swift, he has mental health issues, PTSD caused by Swifts behaviour.

 

Nothing I can do just hope we both live to see this loan repaid.

Biggest mistake I have ever made.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know you can reclaim PPI back up to twenty years ago, that aside Portfield Loans no longer trade. I think it's still an idea to write to the the PPI insurance company and find out if they paid a commission to Swift for your business. This imo would make Swift involved in the sale.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes you can claim back 20 years if company still trading, FSCS would have got involved if it had been after Jan 2005. I will phone and ask them but every avenue I have tried revert back to Portfield. Swift probably paid Portfield a commission but it all reverts back to it being unregulated and prior to Jan 2005.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...