https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-provident-fin-doorstep-lending-idUKKBN2CJ08W

You are talking about a "caseworker". I probably lost the plot a little. Who is that person? Who are they working for? Yes, file the defence.

I'm keep on trying to explain to you that I think that you should send the above letter verifying your ID and which you are sending to Aviva – that you should send a copy of that to the FOS and make it clear that on the letter that you are copying back to the FOS so that Aviva understands that the FOS can see what is happening.

Well it's up to you. I would send a copy of your SAR response to the FOS as well. What harm can it do?

I think it is worth letting Aviva know at this point that you are involving the FOS even on the data disclosure. It might make them concentrate little bit more – if they bothered to take notice. The objections will be dealt with later.

When it won't be struck out at mediation. They don't do that. It would only be struck out later on if it got to court because the mediation had failed. You have to emphasise to the mediator that you are relying on the 1999 Act. You should probably indicate to the mediator that if they won't play ball then you will join the finance company in as a co-defendant and that the dealer should then consider if this will damage their relationship with the credit card provider which might have other consequences.

Yes but was the reservation fee intended to be part of the purchase price? If they eventually refunded you and they are able to argue that it wasn't part the purchase price then they might have a basis for saying the contract was only formed after you saw the vehicle.

Okay well if you paid a reservation fee then I suppose that you have got a good argument to say that the contract was made before you ever saw the vehicle. What were the conditions of the reservation fee? Was it refundable?

Looks fine. Send a copy to the FOS – make sure that it is clear to Aviva that you are sending a copy to the FOS

To add to the above, I think you are going to find it very difficult to challenge something like survey which to a certain extent is going to be a statement of opinion. In order to challenge it, you're going to have to get a corroborative opinion which means getting someone else to assess the property, assesses the survey report which you have received and to tell you whether or not it is flawed in the way that you think. I don't see any other way to do it. More complicated than that – if you do find that an independent evaluation of your report confirms your view that it is of poor qua

Personally I would skip all the outrage of finding things amusing and insulting et cetera. As my own personal style but I would tend to keep the emotion out of it simply states actually that you consider that the requirements are intended to place a deliberate obstacle in your path and probably a breach of the data protection rules as they clearly have all the necessary information to identify you because they have been writing threats et cetera for some considerable time, not to mention correspondence with the FOS. I think I'd then point out that if they do exceed the deadline that not

Open

Thanks for letting us know. I'm getting a bit worried. This is about the third courier -related happy ending that we've had in a very few days. Maybe we going to have no one left to sue

I'm afraid I would keep on telephoning them to make sure that there are no mistakes. Email them as well – but if I were you would telephone them for your own certainty that they have got what is needed and that they are going to expedite the SAR

And by the way, just to let you know that you are simply another person in a long line of people that we get onto this forum who made decisions to buy vehicles along distance away and then have to suffer the consequences. I said this before – and this is for your benefit but also for the benefit of others who visit thread. We are repeatedly getting people who spot a car somewhere else in the country – 100 miles away – 200 miles away – even 400 miles away and for some reason rather they think it's the only car for them and they must have it. What they never bothered to factor in unt