Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About LateDeveloper

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 makes it an implied term of the contract that goods be as described, of satisfactory quality and fit for purpose. You are quite correct of course in your assumption that non-faulty goods are at your own expense. You should not lose out financially as a result of a breach of contract and accordingly all costs of returning the item should be met by the seller.
  2. The law states that the seller is to pay for the return, not you. Whenever I buy off Ebay, I refuse to rate a seller until I know the goods are in perfect condition. Similarly I will always leave bad feedback on Amazon if a seller is rubbish, but conversely I will do the opposite if a seller is good. Whenever anyone shops on line, the mantra "buyer beware" should be foremost in the purchasers mind. A lot of things sold on both Ebay and Amazon are through drop shipping where the seller thinks they are not directly responsible for poor quality goods, given they never actually see the
  3. Which is why I said the first part is a no brainer, given that T&C's do not make this clear. Also the law does need to be made clear in as much as there can be no opting out of the law even if some company includes a clause in their T&C's to say that by accepting the T&C's then a consumer is opting out of their rights given under the law. If you read the link I gave, the same company does exactly the same thing worldwide including in the UK and Europe.
  4. I agree with Which, but as far as asking large business leaders around a table to discuss matters,is like an antelope asking a pack of hyenas to have a chat. Its also like asking a load of bankers to be honest, its just not going to happen. Before any talks on terms and conditions can be useful, terms and consumer law has to be fair, which the present system is not. With a lot of purchasing done on line the consumer protection falls far short of anything approaching what is fair, with companies which are allowed to opt out or at least change the law by adding restrictions into the T&
  5. I have never really had a problem with Amazon and upon any occasions that they have asked for further information, I have pointed them to the relevant part of consumer law. I do tend to think that Amazon need to be on solid ground with sellers and just refunding with out just cause is not in their interest, regardless of their charter with the customer. When any company has a no quibble guarantee, it is within their right to refuse to serve a customer, How about this; I as a customer return a lot of items to different sellers through Amazon and yet those same sellers do not hav
  6. This story starts 18 years ago by way of this company getting a repossession order on my property. I was sick with worry and knew nothing of the law, however after seeing my Solicitor, he had a Barrister appointed to my case. Subsequent action in the courts and a side room conversation between my Barrister and the Alliance & Leicester Solicitor, ended in the building society agreeing, in front of a judge, to all conditions my Barrister laid down. This included all court cost being paid, all charges being removed from my account, along with the withdrawal of the repossession order. The
  7. I too have had trouble with the Alliance & Leicester. I suggest you read the following : http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?825-BCOB-the-hidden-rules http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?827-Examples-of-unfair-treament http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?826-How-Can-BCOB-Protect-You-From-Your-Bank-s-Unfair-Treatmen As I stated I too have had trouble with this company for many years, years in which they have failed to provide information. This looks as if it is company policy, however it is illegal and despite rheto
  8. That is called a set-aside order, where the court sets aside a previous decision to allow for new evidence to be submitted. Even if a Building society is granted a repossession order, it is not the end of the story by any means, and if they can be shown to be misleading or fraudulent in their dealings with their client, then that decision can be overturned.
  9. In your case I would take them to court and sue them, given RBS have just been fined £20.7 million (£14.5 million for early payment) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28948518 This is just gross mis-selling of a product and a change to a contract must be agreed by both parties for it to be legal. It is encouraging that the FCA are actually doing something, although it is rather cynical, given the amount of cases reported by various people of them having done nothing to date. I would presume people take the adjudicators opinion of a case, and not let the case go all the way to the Om
  10. I have a similar case going through the Financial Ombudsman in the UK at this moment in time, so hopefully he will take heed of this judges ruling, despite it being in Ireland. This is apparently common practice, not just with RBS, but with all mortgage lenders, and the adjudicator apparently thinks it is fine, despite an earlier court ruling that capitalisation without an agreed change in the original mortgage agreement is not legal.
  11. Sorry been away If you are making a claim for PPI, then the total amount of PPI should be readily available from the lender. It all depends on how they have calculated the PPI. For instance, if they have added interest onto the loan, then calculated the PPI on the Loan + Interest as a percentage, it would come to a greater amount than if they had just calculated the PPI on the loan before interest. They should give you all these payments in detail, showing the loan amouts, loan interest, and PPI payments made/to be made itemised. They may well have even given you an interest rate on
  12. Try again for a rough calculation take the interest charged and divide by the amount borrowed. To calculate the actual interest then it depends on how they have applied the charge. Depends on wether they charge the interest annually, monthly or daily and at what frequency the reduce the debt. Below is an annual interest rate charged annually. example would be 10,000 reducing by 2500 per year. interest on the first year would be (10000 x 1.0626) - 10,000 = A interest on the second year would be (7500 x 1.0626) - 7500 = B and so on, for C and D Add A + B + C + D togethe
  13. I did write it all out for you, but the post went invisible for some reason. What is the repayment period charge. ie what charge over how many installments ?
  14. See a decent Solicitor. A & L have the nasty habit of making it appear that they have sent you a letter from a solicitor. If you look at the letter it is not a real signature, so is therefore unlawful. A solicitor will be able to represent you, not only in court but also in dealing with these muppets. If they do refer it to a debt collection agency, you can talk to them and propose a repayment to them, if they refuse, put it in writing and send it. Documentary evidence is everything if it ever came to court action, so keep a file with all communications in it, one of the reason
  15. Mortgage account. I presume this is a case of misleading the lender into thinking it is a legitimate charge from a solicitor.
  • Create New...