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

PPI Newbie


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2282 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

Hi all and thank you for allowing me to join the group.

 

I would appreciate any advice and help you can offer me.

 

I have started the process of attempting to claim back for miss-sold ppi on two old personal loans with Halifax both for small amounts £1,000 and both taken over a repayment plan of 24 months.

 

I have received correspondence from the Halifax clearly showing both loan agreement account numbers at the top of the letter. Sorry I should also state both loans were back in the early 90's.

 

From the correspondence it appears that they are aware that we were miss-sold PPI or so it appears from the correspondence and have asked for clarification on how we feel we were miss-sold the insurance.

 

They have also provided me with quite a lengthy questionnaire to complete which I have done to the best of my ability and I have also enclosed a short written chronology of events which I believe lead to the miss-selling of the policy.

 

So guys my question is this.

It appears that the Halifax still have details of the loans we took out back in the early 90's as they have provided evidence of the 2 account numbers for the loans

 

which leads me to believe they are just seeking clarification from us as how it was miss-sold but as this is the first time I have ever done this, am I fighting a losing battle considering the time that has passed

 

Michelle x

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi

have you sent off their form yet, if not hold back atm. the fos form is usually preferable.

banks were obliged to send out poss missell letters where it was obvious. loyds did for eg. which usually ends up in a result.

wait for further input.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi

have you sent off their form yet, if not hold back atm. the fos form is usually preferable.

banks were obliged to send out poss missell letters where it was obvious. loyds did for eg. which usually ends up in a result.

wait for further input.

 

 

Hi, no I have not sent it just yet. I have completed the form and provided a short detailed account of what happened when we applied for the loans.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well don't

use the FOS questionnaire here.

 

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/ppi/index.html

 

id be getting an sar running to them as well before the proof hits the shredders

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...