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 
      • 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

CIFAS - evidence of conspiracy required


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5460 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

My own experience is that this organisation is a forum through which the financial services industry conspires to share unproven and defamatory information. By creating an "organisation" it seems that they place themselves above the law and believe that they can say whatever they want about an individual without any substantiation or proof.

 

In conjunction with a barrister colleague. I am interested to mount a campaign to expose CIFAS' methods. We believe that, given sufficient support and evidence, there is a possibility of class actions for criminal conspiracy, criminal libel and civil damages.

 

Crucial to these issues are the barriers which CIFAS and its member organisations place in the way of those who object to CIFAS entries on their credit files. My own experience is that they simply ignore correspondence and I need as much evidence as I can gather to show that this is their normal practice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I understand the original post especially this bit:

 

Crucial to these issues are the barriers which CIFAS and its member organisations place in the way of those who object to CIFAS entries on their credit files.

 

I have just had a read around the site, why would anyone object to a CIFAS entry, you pay and request to have this entry put onto your file, it is not put there by others forceably.

My objection to it is that it is first off a money making [problem], £12 collected per year per request to have this mark on your file. In no way does it cost more than 10p to enter your name in their database and put a tick in a box when it appears.

Subsequent years require no action at all so it is 100% profit.

 

The second point (and most serious) is that the information supplied to have this 'mark' put onto your file (everything about you and your family including the colour of grandads underpants), will be given to debt recovery companies. I don't see how that has any affect on fraud prevention or identity theft.

 

The mark just tells the enquirer to do further checks on to establish the application for a loan etc is genuine, something they should be doing anyway.

 

If just 1,000,000 people sign up for this, that is an annual profit of £12 million pounds per year.

Edited by Conniff
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you misunderstand CIFAS. Yes, you can have a CIFAS warning put on your address if you believe that you may be the victim of identity theft but this is only one type of CIFAS warning and probably the least often used.

 

I have six, yes SIX, CIFAS warnings against me on my Experian and Equifax credit files from Virgin Media falsely stating (not alleging) that I gave "false or misleading information" in a credit application.

 

These are lies but are published without any substantiation or proof. I have written to Experian and Equifax but they just brush it aside and say there is nothing they can do. I have written twice to Virgin Media and they have simply ignored me, not even bothering to reply. I have written to CIFAS and they hace said they will get back to me in 14 days. Meanwhile, these false and clearly malicious reports remain on my file.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read a lot on the site but didn't see the bit where those signed up can also put markers.

 

In your case, I would SAR Virgin right away and then compare the info they are claiming is false or misleading with what your actually said.

I would do this irrespective of what CIFAS comes back with if they remove the offending marks or not.

 

Do you have a paper copy of your file with marks on there, if not perhaps you could get a copy of your file in case they disappear.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I too have the same problem with CIFAS warnings - I have three identical ones which Natwest put onto my credit file with Experian in June last year. They all say that i gave false or misleading information, which i have never done!

 

I actually applied online for a step account in June 07 and recieved an account number and internet bank pin etc, then two days later i recieved a letter from Natwest saying my application was unsuccesful as i didnt meet their criteria, i was given Experians address and the usual crappy information leaflet. Next day i received a bank statement from Natwest saying account closed - i had the account for two days! I rang and questioned it but they couldnt find any record of me on ther system.

 

Anyway i didnt find out about the CIFAS warnings till June this year, i wrote to the address for Natwest on my credit file 8 weeks ago asking why they have put these warnings on and asked them to be removed - i've heard nothing back from them. Any idea what i should do next as i am positive this affects my chances of credit - i cant even open a basic bank account now!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

Im having the same problem with cifas, hbos put something on me, I cant get a bank account either.

 

HBOS I have written to and sent an SAR to but they say they hold no information on me, and even after an official complaint I havent heard anything back from them except a letter to acknowledge my complaint and that they will resolve it in x days, which they have passed now.

 

The real concern is that I am being told the cifas entry will be removed after a year, but others are telling me if I try to fight the organisation that put it there then they will keep it on for longer...

 

Geez I feel like my human rights are being violated here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...