Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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

Hsbc Ppi


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5714 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

I am new to this and wondering if anyone can give me any advice. I took a loan out with HSBC in April 2004, the PPI on this was £6690. In March 2007 I paid off that loan with another loan fron HSBC for which the PPI is £5098. I never got a refund from the first loan's PPI and on both occasions I was told by the bank that I could only have these loans if I took out the PPI.

 

I now feel I was mis sold PPI and would I be eligable to claim this back?

How would I go about claiming it back?

How will it affect the laon I have taken out now?

 

Any help would be gratefully recieved.

Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Hutchy

 

I would suggest that you start with sending HSBC a SAR request so that you can obtain all the information they hold on you for the loan accounts. Don't forget to include your £10 cheque or postal order (this is the statutory fee for obtaining information on as many accounts as you have or have had). Send the letter by first class signed for post and keep a copy for your records.

 

You can tweak the template here Full S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) for ppi to include a pararaph requesting true copies of the Credit Agreements as signed by you for each loan, a true copy of the Terms & Conditions of each loan including those relating to the PPI element. The latter will reflect any exclusion clauses and should contain a clause telling you how much you would be refunded for early repayment/settlement of the loan. Also request transcripts of the sales telephone conversations for each loan, if these took place.

 

Do have a particular reason for thinking that once the loan was paid off you would receive a refund of PPI if no claim was made on it during the lifetime of the loan?

 

If the loans were sold to you over the telephone then the sales transcripts will indicate whether the seller told you that you could only have the loan if you took out the PPI and provide you with valuable proof for the next stage of your claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that settling the loan 3yrs early I would get some sort of refund.

 

Also I never actually handled the loan over the phone, it was in my local branch.

 

I was having trouble getting the loan, even though I'd not missed any payments on my original one, therefore I was told that if I took out the PPI then I could have the loan (I was told to take PPI on the original loan as it was over a certain amount and would ensure it would go through).

 

I've also still got the copies of both agreements that I signed, should I still send off for an S.A.R?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Hutchy

 

Do you have the Terms & Conditions for the loans too? These may stipulate any refunds you were/are entitled to.

 

I am of the opinion (speaking from personal experience) that a customer will often feel that the lender is hedging on giving the loan, then as soon as PPI is mentioned and signed up for, hey presto! the loan is agreed ...

 

When you went through the loan process, did the salesperson discuss PPI options, alternative products available to you and their comparative prices? Did you feel that you had made an informed decision about the PPI product and that it suited your own personal needs and circumstances? Did the salesperson go through any exclusion clauses with you? If you had known the sizeable chunk of money that would be added to the loan, and that there were much cheaper PPI options available to you, would you have signed up or it or even taken out the loan in the irst place?

 

What I'm getting at here is the unscrupulous methods used by banks in getting customers to sign up for PPI. Lenders are regulated in their selling practices by the FSA and by the Banking Code, and they are obliged to make all of this information available to you ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a good suggestion, but before this Hutchy needs to have all his/her information to hand and be clear about the case for mis-selling, hence me asking clarifying Qs.

 

If you escalate a complaint to the FOS or make a claim in court, you need to be able to demonstrate that you have given the lender every opportunity to provide proof that mis-selling did not take place.

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the terms and conditions here too.

 

It was never explained how much the actual total would be or that interest would be added, I was never told of any exclusions. Also I was never told that I could have this PPI privately.

 

I was just asked if I wanted it to help my loan application and it would cover me if I was off work ill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you tell us what the Terms & Conditions of the loan and the PPI element of the loan are, i.e., what exclusions are mentioned and if there is a clause that states a refund can be obtained and if so how much ...

 

I realise that they salesperson may not have provided you with all the information they should have done to enable you to make an informed choice about taking the PPI, but the lender may argue that they provided information on the cost element in the documentation they sent to you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...