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
      • 160 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

Swift Advances. Secured Loan Charges reclaim


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4881 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

:D:D

KPMG are Swifts Auditors.................and KPMG paid Over $350 Million dollars in the States to prevent being sued for false accountng............just shows the power of money .......it can over ride all laws if the offer is good enough!!!

 

sparkie

 

;) money its no use in jail matie prob is someone will have to take the fall looks like Johnny thought he was top dog but even he was someone elses puppy, more like a HUSH puppy

he had to run behind his legal team when he couldnt answer the white answers lol prob is he has given to many wrong ones :idea:

bad job when people cant get through to the office especially when the staff and legal team find time to read our jokes:-x:D

 

do they not realise you have been taking the **** out of them from the word go, no one can be that stupid

pick up a penquin two systems for the price of one:?:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Hi everyone:)

 

Just had a letter back from the OFT in response to my complaint about Swift's business practices and in which I happened to mention that Kestrel don't appear to have a credit license.

 

The OFT state the following -

 

'Under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, most businesses that offer goods or services on credit or lend money to consumers, have to be licensed by the OFT. The OFT can refuse or revoke the firm's credit license if it engages in 'unfair or improper business practices, whether unlawful or not'. This includes second-charge mortgages and I have passed the details of your complaint to our Licensing Enforcement section for their information.'

 

So whilst the OFT cannot investigate my particular complaint, hopefully this will go some way towards another nail in Swift/Kestrel's coffin:D

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

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

Hi everyone:)

 

Just had a letter back from the OFT in response to my complaint about Swift's business practices and in which I happened to mention that Kestrel don't appear to have a credit license.

 

The OFT state the following -

 

'Under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, most businesses that offer goods or services on credit or lend money to consumers, have to be licensed by the OFT. The OFT can refuse or revoke the firm's credit license if it engages in 'unfair or improper business practices, whether unlawful or not'. This includes second-charge mortgages and I have passed the details of your complaint to our Licensing Enforcement section for their information.'

 

So whilst the OFT cannot investigate my particular complaint, hopefully this will go some way towards another nail in Swift/Kestrel's coffin:D

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

 

lol a few of the big knobs havent either as well I saw a fake one not to mention fake forged signatures

could not believe my eyes

pick up a penquin two systems for the price of one:?:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Kestrel Companies MUST have an FSA/OFT licence because they boast in their accounts of loans Books ....to have loan books you must have lent money to the domestic consumer which is their priciple business activity ...( so they say):rolleyes: but they have not got any of these ........they also process peoples personal financial account information and details with no DPA licence, they may think things are quiet and going well .........JUST wait folks it heading South.......SXXXLOADS of it.

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Kestrel Companies MUST have an FSA/OFT licence because they boast in their accounts of loans Books ....to have loan books you must have lent money to the domestic consumer which is their priciple business activity ...( so they say):rolleyes: but they have not got any of these ........they also process peoples personal financial account information and details with no DPA licence, they may think things are quiet and going well .........JUST wait folks it heading South.......SXXXLOADS of it.

 

sparkie

 

Hi Sparkie:)

 

Still awaiting a response from the FSA Director of Enforcement and Financial Crime regarding the same issues - will be interesting to see what she has to say about our friends at Kestrel;)

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

Edited by landy_alert

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

Been looking at my statement from Swift my loan also sold to Kestrel Holdings a couple of weeks after I received it.

 

Blackie then you hav a big argument

 

Their term and condition states

That they may transfer their rights to a third party or another company

 

IT does not say we may transfer Part or All of their rights

 

This means that when they transferred/sold your loan to Kestrel..............they transferred the whole lot for reason this term does not say they can pick and choose what they transfer or have transferred/sold or retained....they sold the wole of their rights..... so have NO legal right to take you to Court..............unless they can prove that they bought your particular loan back....which they will find prcticaly impossible because they are selling and transferring loans 2 to 3 times a year. It is money/accounts/borrowing manipulation for gain

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure how we are going to do this in the original beat or a funeral march:D:D

 

Some I believe are having trouble getting through to Swift lately ...........they are spending too much time on the forum ....having so much fun! that's why!!!

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4881 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...