Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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 
      • 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

H.O.L Test case appeal. Judgement Declared. ***See Announcements***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5015 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

@scared

 

the bank are talking crap you can take action if you wish because its a hardship claim however the waiver has also been lifted so they have investigate your claim regardless, if they dont then take court action,although cag has advised to wait for a bit so everything can prepared using the correct argument

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 5.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Has anyone read the FOS section on Bank Charges?

 

Basically states they are still studying the ruling but all complaints currently on hold are unlikely to succeed.

 

No surprise there then they will be happy they get to clear their filing cabinets.

IVA Entry Removed

Nationwide Default Removed

Nationwide Joint Account Default Removed

Natwest Default Removed

Blackhorse Car Finance Court Claim - Won

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cartoon from "The Times".

 

 

Seems to sum up the attitude perfectly !!

 

 

(click on image to see larger)

Times.jpg

All opinions and advice I offer are purely my own, and are offered without any liability. If unsure seek the help of a licensed professional

...just because something's in print doesn't mean its true.... just look at you Banks T&C's for example !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cartoon from "The Times".

 

 

Seems to sum up the attitude perfectly !!

 

 

(click on image to see larger)

 

Brilliant!

 

The skill of the cartoonist--the whole situation summed up in one picture.

 

Pity that it couldn't be a sub heading for this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The suggestion is that claims be put on hold for a couple of weeks while we seek counsel's opinion over the wording of the POCs. Whilst the current POCs/templates do the job, we do think that they can now be strengthened in view of the judges comments, we are also looking into other avenues.

 

Obviously that does not stop anyone from starting the pre-litigation stages, we would just advise waiting before filing at court, or seeking the removal of a stay.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

signed !!

MBNA £250 bank charges refunded.:lol:

MBNA claimed £2700 in PPI:lol:

MBNA default removed.

WESCOT balance written off no cca.

WESCOT default removed.

TIME RETAIL.default removed.

LLOYDS TSB.£150 charges refunded

MINT £220 charges refunded.

currently 4 in dispute unenforcible agreements.

HFOS ordered to remove default

YORKSHIRE paid token £200 PPI going now for full £600

Link to post
Share on other sites

The suggestion is that claims be put on hold for a couple of weeks while we seek counsel's opinion over the wording of the POCs. Whilst the current POCs/templates do the job, we do think that they can now be strengthened in view of the judges comments, we are also looking into other avenues.

 

Obviously that does not stop anyone from starting the pre-litigation stages, we would just advise waiting before filing at court, or seeking the removal of a stay.

 

Thanks Alan. There's absolutely no danger of having our cases struck out in that time is there? I spoke to my CC yesterday regarding a removal of the stay and they recommended moving swiftly as the bank was likely to be requesting all cases be struck off. I'd like to think he was just trying to be helpful, but I'm slightly concerned that the banks are ready to pounce on these stayed claims.

Edited by Camdenite
Link to post
Share on other sites

Cause created on facebook...

 

with both links to the petition on 'Number 10' and 'consumer action group' websites...

 

For those of you who have a 'Facebook' account, the cause can be found under 'Support the thousands of bank charges claimants'... Becoming a member will help circulate the information throughout the web...

Edited by Bigredbus
Typo + addendum

---Aut viam inveniam aut faciam---

 

***All advice given should be taken as guidance... Professional advice should always be taken before any course of action is pursued***

 

- I do not reply directly to any PMs, but you are more than welcome to enclose a link, in a PM, to your post. Thank you -

Make a contribution to this site... Help the CAG keeping on helping you for FREE.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Alan. There's absolutely no danger of having our cases struck out in that time is there? I spoke to my CC yesterday regarding a removal of the stay and they recommended moving swiftly as the bank was likely to be requesting all cases be struck off. I'd like to think he was. Just trying to be helpful, but I'm slightly concerned that the banks are ready to pounce on theSe stayed claims.

 

Quite agree Camdenite.

 

My case is giving me cause for concern because it is only just in the process of track allocation having paid the AQ fee in person on tuesday, so not yet stayed even..........

LTSB PPI on various loans (current/settled) - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 1 Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

MBNA 1 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Charges - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 2 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Accident Ins - Refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage Charges -Partially refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage PPI - Refunded inc CI & 8%

 

Sainsburys (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI +8%

 

Sainsburys (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

M&S Money (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

M&S Money (closed) Card PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Direct Line (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

Debenhams Card (closed) PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Swift Mortgage Charges -Refunded

 

Hitachi Finance (closed) Charges - Refunded

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a claim stayed at the moment against HSBC (since early 2008) and my POC (downloaded at that time from the site here) state

 

The Bank has debited charges from the Account in respect of unauthorised overdrafts and unpaid items, relying on terms on the Banking Contract which were either

 

(1) a penalty payable on breach of contract and unenforceable at common law and/or

(2) unfair terms within the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract regulations 1999 (The Regulations) and unenforceable

 

Do I need to amend anything ? Will send the template letter to lift the stay tomorrow, but not sure if I need to amend my POCs ?

 

I am also worried if I don't move quickly HSBC will apply to have the claim struck out, so have today requested removal of stay using the template on the site.

Still not sure if my POCs are OK or whether I should have amended them. Never mind. They refer to the UTCCR although not specifically to clause 5 or any clause really :-|

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am also worried if I don't move quickly HSBC will apply to have the claim struck out, so have today requested removal of stay using the template on the site.

Still not sure if my POCs are OK or whether I should have amended them. Never mind. They refer to the UTCCR although not specifically to clause 5 or any clause really :-|

 

Unlike its competitors HSBC hasnt made a comment about cases in the court system but it states that "complaints" are to remain on hold while discussions on the way forward are held with the FSA and OFT.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...