Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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 
        • 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

Lloyds TSB Loan..... question


Sharkey3439
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5924 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

Back in 2005 i got into some "slight" problems. At the time i was paying over £600 a month to LTSB on a loan.

 

They agreed to accept reduced payments as part of a pro rata system with my other creditors. After making approximately 4 payments of the reduced amount, (£288), they offered to make this a formal arrangement.

 

This arrangement took the form of a letter stating 2 options, one with PPI, one without, and a reply form. The letter which stated the options included the monthly payment, APR, number of payments and initial amount borrowed. As far as i remember the reply form didn't state these, just option 1 or 2 with tick boxes, don't even think i had to sign it.

 

My question is that even though i am not having any problems meeting these payments, would it be worth sending a CCA request for my own records, and if they can't produce an enforceable document is there really anything that's worth doing with the account. (I don't have enough spare cash to offer a settlement).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that,

 

I did forget to ask that as the loan amount was increased to consolidate my overdraft aswell as the previous loan, would this definatley be considered a new loan, so the CCA from the previous one wouldn't cover it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I hate to be the bearer of bad news,

 

but if a request is not in writing its not a valid request under the CCA 1974

 

and you need to furnish them with the one pound fee too

 

the agreement will not become unenforcable if the request is not in writing even if they dont supply you the agreement you need proof of delivery too

 

 

regards

paul

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe not, but as this is to allow me to actually have a copy on file first, (required to have security/financial vetting for work), if they send it out after a phonecall then so be it, if it doesn't appear in a couple of weeks, then i will send a formal request via post.

 

As there is no rush or problem with the account as yet, no harm trying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Right then, i have been able to secure funds to settle this loan and finally get away from the dreaded Lloyds TSB entirely.

 

Just telephoned their customer services for a settlement figure, and was surprised to find that it is more than the balance showing on the internet banking. After the third time of getting the lass on the phone to repeat herself, i asked why, she replied, there is a £250 settlement fee. But the balance they have, was still higher than the balance showing online even after removing this fee.

 

Couple of things, can they put the balance up again, or can i get away with only paying the "advertised" price? Also, how can they justify a £250 fee for me giving them their money back?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...