Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

WF - unsecured loan, only fees left


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2366 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

loan int rate

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

on the print menu..

print active sheets only

fit cols to page

 

 

there a charges reclaim letter see the recent reclaim threads in this forum

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

Super! Thank you.

 

Dx100uk you have been amazing 😘

 

Hopefully the final question...

 

What did if it's a loan in joint names, where they are divorced, no longer speak and I have always been the one to pay it. How can get the monies just paid to me?

Link to post
Share on other sites

i doubt you'll get any payout anyway

you'll simply be fobbed off with regard to their FCA wavier.

however the unlawful fees will probably simply be removed from any balance.

 

 

it is interesting though that the loan is still active under welcome..

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

  • 3 months later...

Dear Sir/Madam

My request

I am writing to ask you to refund the charges which you have levied from my account between 09/08/2007 to 27/08/2014 in respect of late payment, arrears management, litigation fees and legal costs to the sum of £3,000.75 and the sum of £4,820.77 representing the contractual rate of interest applied by yourselves in respect of the said charges this totals £7,821.52 (Please find enclosed schedule of charges detailing dates, amounts and interest) and. We now understand that such fees are unlawful at Common Law, Statute and recent consumer Regulations.

In the case of Castaneda and Others v. Clydebank Engineering and Shipbuilding Co., Ltd. (1904) 12 SLT 498 the House of Lords held that a contractual party can only recover damages for actual or liquidated losses incurred from a breach of contract as oppose to a charge which represents a penalty. This law was confirmed and upheld in Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage and Motor Co Ltd [1915] AC 79. A charge will be held to be a penalty if the sum stipulated for is extravagant and unconscionable in amount in comparison to the greatest loss that could conceivably be proved to have followed from the breach. A penalty clause is void in its entirety and unenforceable.

I would like to bring your attention to the following statement by The Office of Fair Trading:

"A term in a secured icon agreement which requires the borrower to pay more for breaching the contract terms than actual costs and losses caused to the lender by the breach (or a genuine pre-estimate of that) is likely to be regarded as an unfair penalty and to be unenforceable both at common law and (in a consumer mortgage) under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations.

I believe that the charges you have levied of far exceed any true cost to yourself as a result of our breaches and any genuine pre-estimate you could conceivably reach. If you disagree, then will you please demonstrate this by letting me have a full breakdown of the costs to which you have been put to as a result of my breaches, in order to reassure us that your charges really do reflect your costs.

I really hope that this matter can be resolved amicably and without the need for redress to the courts. Thus I am asking that you refund the charges which have unlawfully been levied on my account. Failure to refund all the money unlawfully taken from us will result in us taking further action. I will give you 14 days to reply accepting, unconditionally, my request in principle and letting me know a date by which we will receive payment. If you do not respond, or you do not respond positively, within this time period, I shall send you a letter before actionicon giving you a further 14 days in which to reflect. I believe that these targets are more than sufficient for a large company such as yours with dedicated staff and departments.

After that, there will be no further communication from me and I shall issue a claim at the expiry of the second deadline. Thus take this letter as 28 days written notice of my intention to issue a court claim should you not comply with my request. I hope that you will enter into a sincere dialogue with me about this matter and I am writing this letter to you on the assumption that you will prefer to do this than merely respond with standard letters and leaflets.

does this look ok ?

 

 

 

 

 

Can I use this for fees on a Welcome Finance loan, please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

no because the OFT went years ago

have you a thread running?

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

So was mine until I went down the reclaim route! I Didn't have any fees removed Lol

 

What happened?

 

I have only just picked this up. I'm writing to them tomorrow with the first letter

Link to post
Share on other sites

posts moved to your own thread.

 

 

you can use that letter as it wont matter re post 30

 

 

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

no because the OFT went years ago

have you a thread running?

 

Yes it's on the WF page/thread

 

posts moved to your own thread.

 

you can use that letter as it wont matter re post 30

 

dx

 

I am being really thick.

 

What can I use to write to WF?

 

Or the vary the one in the library for mortgages?

 

Actually thinking about it, I can claim hardship. I've got all the relevant paperwork to show I supported myself and 4 children with no maintenance from ex during the whole time I paid the loan. Plus umpteen failed DD attempts causing more fees

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

why?

they have 8 weeks.

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...