Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Reapstar
      SAR distress claim against Parking Eye

      By Reapstar · Posted

      Thank you
    • jk2054
      SAR distress claim against Parking Eye

      By jk2054 · Posted

      Well we can't predict what the judge will believe. PE will say that they responded in the deadline and you will say they don't. Nobody can tell what a random DJ will decide. However if you go for an OOC settlement you should still be able to get some money
    • Reapstar
      SAR distress claim against Parking Eye

      By Reapstar · Posted

      What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • lookinforinfo
      EPC ANPR PCN - St Nicholas Street, Weymouth DT4 8AD

      By lookinforinfo · Posted

      I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • dx100uk
      One Parking Solutions Windscreen PCN - private flat bays, share of freehold . - Durrington, West Sussex.

      By dx100uk · Posted

      please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

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

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

home insurance renewal cooling off period

chlojomojo
 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5652 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

chlojomojo

chlojomojo

Posted
Posted

Hi there,

 

This is my very first post on this forum!!! I usually spend hours on the internet trying to find info on issues I have and stumbled across this site today. Wish I found it yonks ago as it seems to have everything I need to know under one roof!

 

Anyway sorry I digress. We received our renewal for home insurance a couple of weeks ago. They quoted us double what we where paying last year so obviously I wasn't willing to pay it. I did a lot of searching and have found lots of quotes for the original price I was paying (and some for less). Asked other half to ring them to find out when the renewal date was (as we misplaced the letter in the meantime)......asked him again and again and he promised he would sort it so left it with him. I have found the letter today and the renewal was 24/10/08.

 

Now, I understand I will have to pay some money as technically they have been covering us but what can they charge us? I have also read that I may be charged an admin fee. I have tried to look on said insurers website but can't find the info I need. Could they charge us a high admin fee? The FSA website states that we shouldnt receive a penalty in the cooling off period and surely a high admin charge is a penalty?

 

Can anyone give me advice please? (Yes I know the main bit of advice anyone can give me is never let other half deal with anything like this again. lol!) I want to be fully prepared before I ring them as I know they are gonna try charge me loads.

 

Cheers AMx

Link to post
Share on other sites
chlojomojo

chlojomojo

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi there,

 

Thanks for your replies.

 

Its direct line. We actually received our policy in the post yesterday and it came with a booklet. Its really hard to understand. It states that if you pay with montly instalments you have the right to cancel within 21 days and the will give you a full refund. Great! Then in another part they state that if you cancel you have to pay one months fee as a cancellation charge. Not sure if that applies to me or not.

 

Yes it was a auto renewal - and it was double the price even though we have never made a claim......can you believe it!!

 

xxxAM

Link to post
Share on other sites
LemonTwist

LemonTwist

Posted
Posted

I just had a look at the policy booklet online and I pretty certain you'll be OK. It says you can cancel within 21 days of receiving the documents and you'll get a full refund as long as you haven't made any claims since the policy renewed. It doesn't even sound as though they will charge you for the days of cover that you used. As you pay by monthly instalments, you would have to cancel the consumer credit agreement as well - it doesn't say there will be any charges for doing this.

 

However, it does sound like Direct Line have broken one of the rules - insurance companies are required by FSA rules to send out the renewal documents at least 21 days before the renewal date, so if you only received your policy documents yesterday, but the renewal date was actually the 24th of October, then they are very late. So they shouldn't try to charge you as you only just received your documents.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
vusys1

vusys1

Posted
Posted
I just had a look at the policy booklet online and I pretty certain you'll be OK. It says you can cancel within 21 days of receiving the documents and you'll get a full refund as long as you haven't made any claims since the policy renewed. It doesn't even sound as though they will charge you for the days of cover that you used. As you pay by monthly instalments, you would have to cancel the consumer credit agreement as well - it doesn't say there will be any charges for doing this.

 

However, it does sound like Direct Line have broken one of the rules - insurance companies are required by FSA rules to send out the renewal documents at least 21 days before the renewal date, so if you only received your policy documents yesterday, but the renewal date was actually the 24th of October, then they are very late. So they shouldn't try to charge you as you only just received your documents.

 

They only have to send a renewal invite within 21 days,the actual docs etc will only arrive after the renewal date. But as prev as they have allowed 21 days no worries.some companies are 14 days from the start or renewal date or from when you receive your docs

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...