Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sunak actually nailed it in his boring speech yesterday  Starmers only offering is vote to be depressed  Just about sums up lefties  Humourless and Depresive🤣
    • Ah ok I will see if we receive it in the post tomorrow before I go to work. We want to see theirs so we know what documents they will list ? If their N265 is not received then best to send ours so that we do not miss the claimants deadline as per their draft directions.  What would happen if we did miss the deadline even by 1 day ? The claimant would use it against us in court ?  I scanned and posted in #159 the claimants continuation sheet attached to the N244 where they give a background of the case and reference e-mails etc. After this I will continue to work on the WS which is also causing me anxiety. This will also be used to object to their SJ application. I will advise tomorrow if anything else is received.  
    • Last September our 2019 plate Motorhome went to Brownhills of Newark for its annual habitation check/service. Whilst on there site for the day one of their drivers managed to drive it into a lamp post and put a 2m long scratch down the side of the body. They didn't own up to the damage, but luckily we noticed it before leaving the site, at which point the admitted fault and said they would fix it in house rather than go through the insurance. As they are an authorised Motor home repairer etc we agreed to this and a time frame of 3 weeks was given for the repair, which was booked in for late November. It could not be booked in sooner for the repair as we had a weekends away etc booked with the vehicle until mid November.  3 weeks, and a simple re-spray has now evolved to 18 weeks of them having the vehicle, due to the spray job having to be done 3 times, a window seal not been re-fitted correctly, leading to rain water pouring into the van and the replacement decals been applied wrong twice & having to be re-ordered from Elddis who originally built the camper. We finally got the vehicle back in late April, still minus 1 of the decals.   Back in March we had an email from Brownhills asking what compensation we would accept due to the delays in returning the vehicle to us (They have had it for 18 weeks instead of the initial 3 weeks which was agreed). Once we finally got the vehicle back we told them what we expected (Basically the value that the camper has depreciated by in the extra 15 weeks they have had it and which time we were unable to use it). They are now refusing to honour any compensation and are only offering us a free service for when this is due in September.   Legally where do we stand?  Obviously we are not taking it back to them for a service, given that last time they managed to crash it and its taken so long for them to make such a simple repair. We are considering legal action, but are not really sure under what grounds/legislation we could claim. Any advice would be much appreciated.
    • Usual alarmist tripe from the Guardian exposed🤣     Many of the ‘Climate Experts’ Surveyed by the Guardian in Recent Propaganda Blitz Turn Out to be Emotionally-Unstable Hysterics – The Daily Sceptic DAILYSCEPTIC.ORG Last week, the Guardian published a survey of 383 'climate experts' and – shock – many of them turned out to be... The Guardian last week published its survey of ‘climate experts’. The results are a predictable mush of fire-and-brimstone predictions and emotional incontinence. This stunt may have convinced those already aligned to the newspaper’s ideological agenda to redouble their characteristically shrill rhetoric, but encouraging scientists to speculate and emote about the future of the planet looks like an act of political desperation, not scientific communication.
    • Thanks all. Just by way of an update, I've emailed the supplemental WS to both the court and UKPC on Sunday evening.   Had the following autoreply from UKPC, so not sure if anyone would look at it before Thu, is it worth calling them to see if they have received it? Dear Sir/Madam, Thank you for your email. Please be advised that we aim to respond within 28 days. Please note that we cannot accept appeals against parking charges via this inbox and the opportunity to appeal this parking charge has expired. Many Thanks, Litigation Team UK Parking Control Ltd  
  • 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

Welcome Finance PPI Offsetting advice needed Please


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2069 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

Hello

 

Not been on the forum for a while. I hope everyone is well.

 

I recently made 4 sperate claims for PPI to Welcome for unsecured loans taken out in 2001/2/3/4.

I successfully claimed for 2001/2 loans through Aviva as the underwriters of the insurance.

These have been settled and paid to me.

 

I’ve received correspondence from WF about the 2003/4 loans.

They have upheld my complaint on both and the sum due is around £2.5 K.

They have also said however that my account was sold to a third party with a balance of over £3K and that the intend to re-purchase the account and apply my compensation to that balance.

They have sent me a form to sign to agree to this, which obviously I’m not going to do.

 

Firstly

I’m unable to verify the amount they say is outstanding on my account.

 

When my SAR arrived it contained all of the loan agreements and 3 printed statements pertaining to the first three loans but not the final one which I obviously defaulted on.

 

When I queried this they said they had sent everything that they held for me.

How they’ve managed to arrive at how much was owed when they’ve said that 4th statement didn’t exist is one thing.

 

The amount does seem high to me as the 4th loan was for just over £4K and I was paying it (albeit it an agreed reduced rate) until at least mid 2008.

 

Is there any further I can go with this or it the end of the line?

I’ve read about Welcome offsetting on some other threads so I’m not hopeful.

 

Also

I assume the paperwork they’ve sent is with the intention of resurrecting the debt if anyone is daft enough to sign and send it back.

 

Are they likely or even can they resurrect the debt on the back of the successful claim without the signed paperwork?

 

Thanks in advance for any advice.

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you've not paid in 6yrs the debt is SB'd so cant coneback

 

As for the offset

There is little you can do about it sadly

Other than complain its not fair

You could mention they are sb'd

But an OC can do so even if it is

 

I will assume you are in E&W and not Scotland

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

Thanks for the quick reply.

 

That’s pretty much what I thought but just needed it confirming. Oh well. Strangely I don’t recall ever being pursued for this debt by a third party after I defaulted

 

And yes I’m in E&W

Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably because you moved?

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

Incidentally has anyone ever asked WF in this situation for proof that they did ‘re-purchase’ the debt and are indeed the legal owners? I’ve been thinking about how difficult it must be to track such a debt down after all that time. Not only that but surely there is no guarantee they will be able to re-purchase?

 

Not straw clutching just genuinely curious about why they are so confident they can easily re-purchase a debt and if people are being put off taking it further because they think it’s a lost cause. Surely they would need to prove ownership of the debt to justify keeping any compensation?

Link to post
Share on other sites

twill be easy for them to track it down

 

you could ask them to provide a notice of assignment under the law of properties act 1925 before they do so.

and they must produce it too.

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

  • 1 month later...

Hello

 

I thought I’d just report my partial success with this matter after taking it to the FOS. I’ve not had the paper work through yet, just a phonecall with an adjudicator at the FOS.

 

As I understand it the amount awarded and subsequently being used to offset the original debt was in respect of loans 3 & 4 joined together.

 

As loan 4 was a rollover and partially used to pay off the balance on loan 3, the FOS have advised WF that they shouldnt withhold the PPI refund due in respect of loan 3.

 

WF have agreed and will be making an offer of just short of £600.

The amount used to offset is now just over £1000.

The difference is because the PPI was front loaded and loan 3 paid off early with loan 4. I hope that makes sense?

 

The adjudicator advised that as offsetting is standard and accepted I’d be unlikely to be successful with pursuing that angle for the balance. I can of course take it on to an ombudsman if I wanted to. I won’t be though.

 

So whilst my offsetting complaint wasn’t a success, it was worth taking it further and having the sums looked at properly. I just thought that this info may be useful to others pursuing WF for multiple claims.

 

Thank you again for the advice. I will make a donation to help you great people keep helping the rest of us. Take Care

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...