Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you very much for your letter in regard to the above mentioned shipment.  Due to the high volume of parcels coursing through the courier network each day, undergoing continuous processing and handling, certain packages may experience delays or even can get lost in the course of this journey. Please note that due to the time that has passed, this shipment has been declared as lost.  I have today processed the claim and made offers to the value of £75 as a goodwill gesture without prejudice. I do acknowledge that you have mentioned in your letter that the value was higher, however, you did not take out any protection to that amount. The protection for this shipment was £20 and we will not be increasing our goodwill offer any further.    Please log into your account online in order to accept our offer. Once accepted, our accounts department will process the claim accordingly. The claim payment will be processed and received within 7 working days.                                  In addition, a refund of the carriage fee will be processed as a separate payment and will be received within 3 working days.  If I can further assist, please feel free to contact me.   I have also just noticed that yesterday afternoon they sent me an email stating that "after my request" they have refunded the cost of shipping. I did not request the refund so will mention that in my letter as well.
    • Hi I had to leave Dubai back in 2011, during the financial crisis. And only now have I received a letter from IDRWW. Is this anything to worry about about as I have 2 years left until it’s been 15 years(statute barred in Dubai). Worried as just got a mortgage 2 years ago. Could they force me in to bankruptcy? Red lots of different threads on here. And unsure what true and what isn’t. 
    • Not that TOR will see this now he's thrown in the hand grenade. Rayner has plenty of female supporters on X, for a start. As for the council and HMRC, fair enough and I thought Rayner was already in touch with them. That's where it should be dealt with, not the police force. @tobyjugg2 Daniel Finkelstein thinks the same as you about tax. The Fiver theory. How the Fiver Theory explains this election campaign ARCHIVE.PH archived 28 May 2024 17:36:51 UTC  
    • Often with the Likes of Lowells/ Overdales that 'proof' doesn't stand up to scrutiny.   Think about it like a game of poker, they want to intimidate you into folding and giving up as soon as possible, and just get you to pay up and roll over, that is their business model, make you think your cards are rubbish. What they don't expect, and their business isn't set up for it, is for a defendant to find this place and to learn that they have an amazing set of cards to play. Overdales don't have an infinite number of lawyers, paralegals etc, and the time / money to spend on expensive court cases, that they are highly likely to lose, hence how hard they will try to get you to roll over.  Even to the extent of faking documents, which they need to do because the debts that they purchased were so cheap, in the first place. Nevertheless it works in most cases, most people chicken out, when they are so close to winning, and a holding defence is like slowly showing Overdales your first card, and a marker of intention that this could get tricky for them. In fact it may be,  although by no means guaranteed that it won't even go any further than that.  Even if it does, what they send you back will almost certainly have more holes than Swiss Cheese, and if with the help you receive here, you can identify those weaknesses and get the whole thing tossed in the bin.
    • So Rayner who is don’t forget still being investigated by the local council and HMRC  is now begging to save her seat Not a WOMAN in sight in this video other than Rayner  Farage is utterly correct this country’s values are non existent in her seat   Rayner Pleads With Muslim Voters as Pressure From Galloway Grows – Guido Fawkes ORDER-ORDER.COM Guido has obtained a leaked tape from inside a meeting between Angela Rayner and Muslim voters in Ashton-under-Lyne...  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

First Plus Ppi Claim - Next Step?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5967 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 all,

 

I hope I am doing the right thing starting a new thread?

 

Firstly, I really apologise for the long post but am after some good advice.

 

Before I became more financially savvy I took out a secured loan with First Plus. Because of the cashback offer and without realising the implications of a single premium policy, I agreed to the PPI even though I didn’t really need or want it.

 

I have refinanced the loan and settled with First Plus, but am trying to reclaim the PPI. I am claiming mainly on the basis of the following:

 

 

  • Very little attempt was made to ascertain if the insurance was fit for purpose, suitable for our needs or if indeed if we really needed it at all.

  • It was not made clear by the sales advisor that this was a Single Premium Policy and although only lasting for five years, we would be paying for it and interest on it throughout the lifetime of the loan at the loan APR, and furthermore we would need to take out further insurance at the end of the five year term.

  • Following the initial application phase we decided that we did not want the PPI and phoned to ask for a loan agreement to be sent without the PPI added. The sales advisor was very pushy in selling us the policy at this stage so we felt that we could not say no. We were told that this PPI product was specifically tailored for the First Plus loan and that it was unlikely that we would get such sufficient cover from a third party insurance provider; implying that we would be at a disadvantage if we sought cheaper PPI elsewhere.

Now the first letter I received back from them was a basic fob off letter, saying that they did not think there was a case and they could not find evidence of a call with the sales advisor discussing the last point. I re-wrote to them and they have found some further calls but can still not find the one in question. This is despite me asking for a full S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) and pointed out that they had not supplied all calls. The second letter has offered me some money but not the whole lot. My questions are:

 

1) Should I accept?

2) If not do I write to them again or go straight to FOS?

3) I did originally ask for the full premium (less the refund on settlement), interest and the statutory 8%, how do I work this out? I have entered all the figures hoping that someone might help me.

 

Original Cash Loan: £32,000

PPI Loan: £7836.80

Total: £39,836.80

180 months from February 2006 @ 10.4% variable APR (obviously this has gone up and up) – PAID 21 months.

Cancelled PPI Nov 2007: rebate of £1237.56 to loan (reduced payments by about £20) This was after initially asking to cancel it in March 2007.

 

Settled Nov 2007: £37341.24 inc £150 admin fee

Overpayment refund: £65

Now willing to offer rebate of £2531.94 on a pro-rata basis of 78% of the insurance premium, (22% being held back for the provision of claims and admin costs)

 

Hope you can help.

 

HF79 :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. I haven't calculated any of the interest yet. Do you have any tips for working out the 8% and the interest paid?

 

I think the fact that they can't find this call may work in my favour as they can't disprove that it did not occur, and have already admitted they have 'found' other calls, whereas they had previously told me I had received them all.

 

HF79

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/ppi/115106-ppi-loan-issues.html

 

Have a look at this highflyer. There are a few of us after First Plus.

 

If you need help with the interest I have done a spreadsheet for my friend's claim.

BANK CHARGES

Nat West Bus Acct £1750 reclaim - WON

 

LTSB Bus Acct £1650 charges w/o against o/s balance - WON

 

Halifax Pers Acct £1650 charges taken from benefits - WON

 

Others

 

GE Money sec loan - £1900 in charges - settlement agreed

GE Money sec loan - ERC of £2.5K valid for 15 years - on standby

FirstPlus - missold PPI of £20K for friends - WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Goldlady,

 

TBH I just feel so stupid that I could have been so blinkered into thinking they were doing me a favour and that the cash back offer was a win-win.

 

I am just glad to be rid of them after refinancing for a much much lower apr cutting the loan down by 5 years. They have caused me no end of trouble and the cheeky bug**rs even tried to chase me for arrears after settlement, and have changed my credit file to reflect a late payment. That however, is another issue.

 

I would really appreciate having a look at your spreadsheet if possible. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again, it is actually simpler than working it out on a spreadsheet. As you should not have had the PPI in the first place then I have assumed that none of the payments you made have gone towards it (which is usually why you need to use a spreadsheet). On the basis that you had the PPI from 1 Feb 2006 to 1 Nov 2007 you have been charged 638 days interest on the initial figure of £7836.80 - if you base it all on 10.4 APR it makes the interest charged on it to 1 Nov £1424.62. Therefore you should be looking at reclaiming £9261.42 less the money they have already refunded. IMO

BANK CHARGES

Nat West Bus Acct £1750 reclaim - WON

 

LTSB Bus Acct £1650 charges w/o against o/s balance - WON

 

Halifax Pers Acct £1650 charges taken from benefits - WON

 

Others

 

GE Money sec loan - £1900 in charges - settlement agreed

GE Money sec loan - ERC of £2.5K valid for 15 years - on standby

FirstPlus - missold PPI of £20K for friends - WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not added in the 8% but this would be a further grand or so.

BANK CHARGES

Nat West Bus Acct £1750 reclaim - WON

 

LTSB Bus Acct £1650 charges w/o against o/s balance - WON

 

Halifax Pers Acct £1650 charges taken from benefits - WON

 

Others

 

GE Money sec loan - £1900 in charges - settlement agreed

GE Money sec loan - ERC of £2.5K valid for 15 years - on standby

FirstPlus - missold PPI of £20K for friends - WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Wow that is absolutely brilliant.:D:D:D

 

I am about to send the first one. Maybe I should just use your third one and cut out all the cr*p.

BANK CHARGES

Nat West Bus Acct £1750 reclaim - WON

 

LTSB Bus Acct £1650 charges w/o against o/s balance - WON

 

Halifax Pers Acct £1650 charges taken from benefits - WON

 

Others

 

GE Money sec loan - £1900 in charges - settlement agreed

GE Money sec loan - ERC of £2.5K valid for 15 years - on standby

FirstPlus - missold PPI of £20K for friends - WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

BANK CHARGES

Nat West Bus Acct £1750 reclaim - WON

 

LTSB Bus Acct £1650 charges w/o against o/s balance - WON

 

Halifax Pers Acct £1650 charges taken from benefits - WON

 

Others

 

GE Money sec loan - £1900 in charges - settlement agreed

GE Money sec loan - ERC of £2.5K valid for 15 years - on standby

FirstPlus - missold PPI of £20K for friends - WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

Go for it!

 

After my SAR and another request for them to look again and then my first two complaint letters, FP still claimed that they could not find the recordings of a call in which I was talked out of not taking the PPI. After the third they by some miracle 'found' it. So this point despite us claiming initially for a whole raft of reasons seems to have been the nail in the coffin.

 

Such a weight off our shoulders to be finally rid of them. That said I still have to fight them to amend my credit report which they have messed up on.

 

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have won the hardest part of the battle. Good luck with the credit report.

BANK CHARGES

Nat West Bus Acct £1750 reclaim - WON

 

LTSB Bus Acct £1650 charges w/o against o/s balance - WON

 

Halifax Pers Acct £1650 charges taken from benefits - WON

 

Others

 

GE Money sec loan - £1900 in charges - settlement agreed

GE Money sec loan - ERC of £2.5K valid for 15 years - on standby

FirstPlus - missold PPI of £20K for friends - WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...