Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • If Labour are elected I hope they go after everyone who made huge amounts of money out of this, by loading the company with debt. The sad thing is that some pension schemes, including the universities one, USS, will lose money along with customers.
    • What's the reason for not wanting a smart meter? Personally I'm saving a pile on a tariff only available with one. Today electricity is 17.17p/kWh. If the meter is truly past its certification date the supplier is obliged to replace it. If you refuse to allow this then eventually they'll get warrant and do so by force. Certified life varies between models and generations, some only 10 or 15 years, some older types as long as 40 years or maybe even more. Your meter should have its certified start date marked somewhere so if you doubt the supplier you can look up the certified life and cross check.
    • No I'm not. Even if I was then comments on this forum wouldn't constitute legal advice in the formal sense. Now you've engaged a lawyer directly can I just make couple of final suggestions? Firstly make sure he is fully aware of the facts. And don't mix and match by taking his advice on one aspect while ploughing your own furrow on others.  Let us know how you get on now you have a solicitor acting for you.
    • Oil and gold prices have jumped, while shares have fallen.View the full article
    • Thank you for your reply, DX! I was not under the impression that paying it off would remove it from my file. My file is already trashed so it would make very little difference to any credit score. I am not certain if I can claim compensation for a damaged credit score though. Or for them reporting incorrect information for over 10 years? The original debt has been reported since 2013 as an EE debt even though they had sold it in 2014. It appears to be a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 Section 13 and this all should have come to a head when I paid the £69 in September 2022, or so I thought. The £69 was in addition to the original outstanding balance and not sent to a DCA. Even if I had paid the full balance demanded by the DCA back in 2014 then the £69 would still have been outstanding with EE. If it turns out I have no claim then so be it. Sometimes there's not always a claim if there's blame. The CRA's will not give any reason for not removing it. They simply say it is not their information and refer me to EE. More to the point EE had my updated details since 2022 yet failed to contact me. I have been present on the electoral roll since 2012 so was traceable and I think EE have been negligent in reporting an account as in payment arrangement when in fact it had been sold to a DCA. In my mind what should have happened was the account should have been defaulted before it was closed and sold to the DCA who would then have made a new entry on my credit file with the correct details. However, a further £69 of charges were applied AFTER it was sent to the DCA and it was left open on EE systems. The account was then being reported twice. Once with EE as open with a payment arrangement for the £69 balance which has continued since 2013 and once with the DCA who reported it as defaulted in 2014 and it subsequently dropped off and was written off by the DCA, LOWELL in 2021. I am quite happy for EE to place a closed account on my credit file, marked as satisfied. However, it is clear to me that them reporting an open account with payment arrangement when the balance is £0 and the original debt has been written off is incorrect? Am I wrong?
  • 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

PayPlan - Cover My Payments


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2410 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

As soon as I can find where I put the FOS letter I will post the response here with the details.

 

Hi I am in the process of waiting a decision from PayPlan about my cover my payments and cover my life schemes I entered into during my payplan agreement.

Do you have the ref from FOS for the successful claim against them in case they try to decline my claim please?

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Following a recent success with the Financial Ombudsman, a case where PayPlan charged a CAGger over £22 per month to cover their payments in the event of sickness or loss of job was judged to be an insurance product and could be recovered if it was mis-sold.

 

This scheme was called, "Cover My Payments" This 'scheme' was withdrawn in 2014.

 

 

Please note that PayPlan is the trading name of Totemic Limited.

 

This was marketed as a membership scheme however, Payplan charged a variable amount per month based on the payments made. A membership scheme is where a fixed amount is charged.

 

Payplan did a similar scheme called 'Cover My Life' which was, in my opinion, a membership scheme as they charged £60 per year irrespective of how much was paid.

 

I was concerned that this scheme was being mis-sold so I emailed PayPlan:

This is the response I received:

Since the win listed above, I have checked the Financial Ombudsman website and found another 4 cases. These are the reference numbers:

 

DRN 7453238

DRN 5870785

DRN 5970606

DRN 3306582 ( this one is part of a different complaint)

 

So, on one hand we have PayPlan saying it is a membership scheme but the Financial Ombudsman are saying it is an insurance product.

 

If any of you have been a member of Cover My Payments via Payplan, my suggestion is that you query as to whether it was a suitable product for you and if not, reclaim it. It is likely PayPlan will turn you down stating that it is a membership scheme but as I hope I have proved, this is not the case.

 

Hi SilverFox

I have searched the above ref numbers on the FOS site for evidence but they dont show up at all? Ive managed to find the one DRN5870785 which proves the FOS investigated the payments as an insurance policy but wanted some evidence that they found in favour of people claiming against PayPlan.

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I can't remember what details I put in the search boxes as it's been a couple of months. I will continue to search for them today but for now, IF Cover My Payments were NOT an insurance, the FOS would not become involved. Cover My Life was a membership scheme as it charged a fixed fee but as Cover My Payments charged a variable amount, it is this that made it insurance and that the FOS can be involved.

 

The one case you have found states that CMP is an ancillary scheme seperate from the main DMP so any payments made to it would never go to your creditors. The Payment you made for the insurance was split between Trent Services and PayPlan.

 

Those case listed are wins for the consumer. Hopefully I will be able to find the others.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That would be great thanks, they have already agreed the cover my life was mis sold as I didn't sign any paperwork for it. Hoping they will just repay it but want some evidence if I do need to go to FOS.

Is the 8% interest on repayment a standard thing as see that seems to be on most repayments?

Thanks

Lee

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you go to the FOS decisions page and type in Totemic into the business name this brings up a few results that includes

 

DRN 5970606

DRN 7453238

 

and the one you mentioned, Add to the search the dates 1/1/2015

 

As DRN 3306582 was part of a different complaint, I can't quite find it as yet.

 

8% is statutory interest applied by the courts for other money claims so it is what the FOS use when calculating redress

 

Not sure if this works

 

javascript:openPDF('12883');

 

That'd be a no

 

What you do is when you use the search box, copy the reference number and paste it into the top search box BUT remove the space between DRN and the number. This worked for me

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have replied on the other thread. Hopefully the OP will return to give us the fine details of the decision

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi guys

After some help.

I have heard back from PayPlan about the cover my life and cover my payments schemes.

 

 

They have agreed to refund the cover my life scheme as they had no record I even signed up to it

but are not refunding the cover my payments as they say I was given all the information and 14 days to cancel it when I took it out.

 

 

My argument was that I was not disputing taking it out but the fact they told me I needed to have it in order to get my creditors to agree to a debt mangement plan.

 

I have put it on to the FOS who have written back and said that they cannot investigate the PPI policy (I never said it was a PPI policy but one in disguise!) as it was sold to me before the date when 'all this business became regulated'.

 

 

I signed for the policy in Feb 2007 that doesnt seem like a huge amount of time to me.

 

Any advice on where I go from here?

I am still annoyed about paying into something I didnt need, never used and made no impact on reducing my debt.

Thanks

Lee

Link to post
Share on other sites

that date is typically quotes as 2005 before that date they were not regulated.

 

 

so what special about this and 200&?

puzzled

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

Hi

I rang them up as I was confused about it being rejected. They said Payplan were only regulated by them last year?

They were very helpful tho and eventually agreed it was not sold initially as PPI but a membership scheme that is similar to PPI.

They are investing it and are requesting bits from Payplan so will have to sit tight and wait for the outcome!

Thanks

Lee

 

that date is typically quotes as 2005 before that date they were not regulated.

 

 

so what special about this and 200&?

puzzled

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi have you heard anything back yet Lee? Myself and my husband were with Payplan from June 2008 until April 2015 When we left payplan to do a DMP on our own because communication with payplan was shocking. With payments to them going up and down yearly with our wages changing we paid anything from £15 to £33 a month cover my payments and a fiver each for cover my life.. thanks Debbie

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...