Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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

No Claim Bonus lost


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1935 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

I have been involved in very minor car incident where I slightly touched the bumper of the car before me. This was on traffic lights and no damage was done at all (not even a scratch). But the other driver registered this incident with his insurance company and there is a claim case created with my insurance company as a result. The other driver didn’t actually claim any damage and my insurer advised that if there is still no damage claimed after 6 months I can keep my No Claim Bonus intact (the incident happened 11 months ago).

Now, I received a renewal quote, which is much higher than expected and after calling them they advised that they reduced my NCB to 3 years (from 9) because of the claim. They said that I get to keep my NCB only if there is no damage claimed within 18 months (not 6 as advised previously). As a result I need pay more for the renewal, which seems very unfair to me considering there is no damage claim against me and I need to wait 18 months. Seems like money making scheme to me.

Can anyone advised if there is something I can do about this? I didn’t find anything helpful on my policy T&C.

 

Any help would be much appreciated.

Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course you are right. It is a moneymaking scheme.

 

There is probably something you could do about it and I expect the question is how far are you prepared to go.

 

Insurance companies have a statutory duty to treat you fairly. It seems to me from what you say that this is an example of unfair treatment. It's unfair because first of all you tell us that there is no reference to this kind of arrangement in their terms conditions. Secondly, as there has been no claim made then there seems to be no reason why you should be out of pocket.

 

The other thing by the way is that you can almost bet your bottom dollar that the insurance company for the other guy is also increasing their premium as well. It's a nice little earner for both sides and you and the third party are joint piggies in the middle.

 

Your insurer has a statutory duty under ICOBS to treat you fairly. You would have to threaten them and then bring a legal action in the County Court for breach of statutory duty. Of course your insurer has never been treated in this way because unfortunately, to my knowledge no one has ever brought an ICOBS legal action against any insurer. They will either kick out very robustly and spend much more than their saving by trying to fight you or else they will put their hands up.

 

Your chances of success on the basis of what you say are better than 80%, in my view.

 

Of course you could go to the ombudsman but you will then face an uncertain wait of 12 months or more and the likelihood is that the ombudsman will decide against you. By that time you have lost your enthusiasm because the money will already have gone and you will be getting on with your life and you won't be bothered to do anything more and the insurer will come out of it quids in.

 

Insurers are typically dishonest bullies but nobody ever takes them on. It's about time somebody gave them a slap. Would you like to be the first?

Link to post
Share on other sites

the problem is their computer has reassessed you as being a risk so even if you kept your 9 years no claims they would hike the premium.

 

Shop around and see who offers a better price.

 

I had a similar thing with Admiral paying out on a dodgy claim a year after an incident so I wnt to Aviva instead. I explained carefully what had happened and they decided that it wasnt something they woul clobber my no claims for and were cheaper on the basic premium anyway. fail to mention something even of no consequence and they will bite your backside so be upfront.

 

The make your complaint about the failure to honours the terms agreed, they will ahve a recording of the call so they cnat lie their way out of it if they ahve indeed backtracked or rely on something they didnt mention at the time

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...