Jump to content

carled

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    42
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About carled

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. This topic was closed on 03/05/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support their. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group
  2. Thanks for the help. I've had a couple of sullen emails from them confirming their postal address but they seem completely uninterested in trying to resolve this prior to legal action, which seems daft to me in the circumstances! I paid £52 + a bit more for delivery. Used direct bank transfer via Paypal. They're based in the Isle of Man but I've already pointed out to them this doesn't exempt them from complying with UK trading regulations ;-)
  3. I'm still struggling to find any specific clauses in that legislation. In a nutshell I purchased an item on 18th April 2013. It was despatched on 19th April (a Friday) and delivered on 22nd April 2013. Yesterday (22nd April 2014) I contacted the seller to mention the electrical item had stopped working and their response was, "it has a 12 month warranty, that has now expired". I replied to point out I'd only had it for 12 months and that it had been faulty for some weeks before finally completely failing. It's clear from a seal on the inside of the pump that this wasn't properly put in plac
  4. Thanks rebel11. I can't find the word "warranty" anywhere in that document though, so maybe I'm looking for the wrong thing?
  5. Does a "distance sale" warranty start from date of purchase or date of delivery does anyone know please? I can't find any legislation on this.
  6. Blimey... what a phone call. I decided to try and just get to the bottom of the stupidity before going on to the ombudsman and called the A&L/Santander PPI complaints line. I did get through to a human being too! So... we started off by referring to their recent letter referring to the wrong loans (again) and she said that they would have been unable to find reference to any other loans I had in the past. She then asked what the account number was of the loan, I told her I didn't have it, but I'd sent in evidence of PPI and the experian report. She said they hadn't got those docum
  7. The story so far. I had an old loan with A&L (Aug 2000) and was told I had to have PPI as it was a new kind of loan. I don't have any details of that loan any more. Since then I've had two further loans with them, neither with PPI. I do have records of those loans. I wrote to A&L and they told me that they only had details of two loans, neither with PPI. I wrote back saying there was another and they told me they only dealt with motor finance and I must be mistaken. I wrote again and insisted I was right, it WAS for motor finance and the loan was with them, they wrote back again tell
  8. Thanks for that. I have found the relevant SAR letter now. I originally wrote to them with this: And they just sent me details on two later loans I had with them. I rewrote several times telling them there was another loan account from late 2000 and sent them a copy of their letter to me referring to the PPI agreement I'd taken out as mentioned in my original post above, but they most recently wrote back saying "we have investigated your complaint fully and can confirm that we are unable to locate any account held by us with the details you have provided. I must point out that our co
  9. Hi there. I've tried searching for this circumstance and I can't find anything that seems to be a direct match. I am hopeless at searching though, so many apologies if this has been covered before. I had a car payment plan loan from Alliance and Leicester in September 2000. As this was a while ago, the application was phone based. I remember the phone call clearly as I got stressed out by the operative insisting I needed to take PPI out as it was a "new type of loan" even though I told him my employment circumstances meant I was fairly much self-employed and not really suitable for PPI
  10. A private ltd. company I used to be a director of claimed in the small claim action that my company shares were paid for by my director's loan account in 2001 and that I'd never paid the director's loan off. Now as I did have a director's loan account but it was £70 in credit from 2002 until I left in 2009 and had never had the share debt in there, I know this wasn't true and was prepared to argue this in court. As it happened, the judge immediately told the company it was statute barred anyway, so no argument was ever heard. The company has now written stating that, in fact, the shares
  11. Marvellous... so basically the banks have carte blanche to carry on charging, all the time the customer is saying, "oi, excuse me, you shouldn't have charged me in the first place, stop whacking on extra charges now to make it even worse" and nobody can do anything about it, except go to court... ? That seems like money with menaces to me... I also have the impression that the FOS is completely in bed with the banks. The banks have to be proven to have committed cold-blooded murder before the FOS even slaps their wrist.
  12. I ask as I'm arguing (full details in A&L thread) with the FOS about whether A&L should have stopped continuing to charge me (it was a stupid charge in the first place!) as soon as I started disputing the charge with them, rather than continue their idiotic charging policy that ended with them freezing the account when they managed to turn a few quid into a £400 overdraft... (I kid you not) all the time whilst I was telling them they were being daft and I disputed the charge? I maintain to the FOS that the bank charge is a debt and that therefore the OFT guidelines apply in that t
  13. It's currently with an adjudicator. It's gone backwards and forwards a few times now, he's now gone off to consider their actions in light of the OFT guidelines for debt collection. I maintain that what the A&L were doing from the first charge was chasing me for a debt, which I was disputing. I'm probably wrong, legally, but he's gone off to consider the matter again.
×
×
  • Create New...