Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi all, We bought a part to fix our washing machine approx 13 months ago direct from the manufacturer of the washing machine via phone. This part then failed 13 months later, as confirmed by their own engineer, who was sent by the manufacturer (who is also the retailer for the part) FoC. The engineer actually installed a replacement part, the machine came back to life, but they then removed the part used for testing (and ours reinstalled) as "we would be charged for it". The retailer are refusing to replace the part, stating that they only warranty parts for 90 days. When I stated that I believed the Consumer Rights Act gives me longer than that, they insinuated that it did not, and this was repeated by many representatives. AIUI for goods bought more than 6 months ago, I need to get an engineers report to confirm the part has failed? Or that it has failed due to manufacturing issues? Or would the companies own engineers report suffice? Also, does anyone have any other decent contact details for Hotpoint (or the Whirlpool group)? Thanks, GH
    • Thank you for that "read me", It's a lot to digest, lots of legal procedure. There was one thing that I was going to mention to you,  but in one of the conversations in that thread it was mentioned that there may be spies on the Forum,  this is something that I've read quite some time ago in a previous thread. What I had in mind was to wait for the thirty days after their reply to my CCA request and then send the unenforceable letter. I was hoping that an absence of signature could be the Silver Bullet but it seems that there are lot of layers to peel on this Onion.  
    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
  • 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
      • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Abbey Subject To 40 Days?!


Cola
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6429 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

Hi all,

 

My fella is a couple of weeks behind me in getting back his charges. Just asked how long he has to wait til his 40 days are up and he said that Abbey said that they are NOT subject to 40 days.

 

In fact here's his message:

It said in the letter they sent me that not all records are to hand, they are on microfiche film and are not subject to the 40 day ruling. they sent me what they had on file and i just have to wait for them to get the others off of microfiche.

 

Is this right? What makes them so special?! If it's not what can we do when the 40 days are up?

 

Ta

 

Cola

Link to post
Share on other sites

scAbbey

  • 1st August - Sent S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) recorded delivery with cheque
  • 2nd August - Letter received by Abbey
  • 10th August - Cheque cashed
  • 11th August - Microfiche argument received
  • 14th August - Abbey receive microfiche letter and I also receive 13 statements
  • 25th August - Received Abbeys 'sorry you have to complain' letter

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Cola

 

Seems like you've received their standard computer generated reply!! It was'nt from Pam Speed by any chance was it!!!! Don't worry, it seems to be part of the process of getting your charges back.

 

If your 40 days are not up yet, send them the following letter. Adjust it and send it to Pam Speed & Regulatory Compliance in Milton Keynes.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/4031-abbey-microfiche-argument.html

 

Also take a look at the link below, there are 3 scenarios. I've not bothered with the first scenario as I sent the above letter, but when my 40 days are up I'll be sending the second scenario letter and chasing the shABBEY up for non-compliance.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/6986-data-protection-act-non.html

 

When your 40 days are up, then you have to chase them up for non-compliance, but at the same time there is nothing wrong with you putting an estimated claim in based on the information they have given you. At least you will get the ball rolling on your claim, and when they eventually get the required info out to you, you can then adjust your claim.

 

Hope this is not too much information, and hope it helps. I'm at about the same stage as you.

 

Phil

This is only my personal, honest opinion!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to butt in on your thread but i'm in similar situation.(have own thread running but not many takers PeterR32 v Abbey).

 

I have had the Pam Speed letter which I replied with the microfiche letter, then I have received letter from Marc Winder '.....unhappy that you have felt to complain...blah blah blah'

 

I have approx 10 days left before my 40 days are up. Will be keeping track of your thread as we are on a similar timeline.

 

Good luck :smile:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi, sorry for the delay. We have been away!

 

Dave did as said and sent the letter chasing them up after the microfiche argument. Today we got a reply. Well not a reply, more of a standard delay. It's basically a 'complaints' reply saying that they will thoroughly investigate.. and get back to us in FOUR WEEKS TIME?!

 

It's getting really annoying now but we don't really knowhow much we should be claiming for without the statements. What can we do?

 

Any help, as always would be appreciated. Feels like we're banging our heads against brick walls!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I reminded Pam speed TODAY (anagram of deep spam?) that as information, is stored on computer (on their central database ????) i am entitled to see it under data protection s,a.r etc, as my 40 days have passed i also reminded her that their are severe penalties.

 

And i have, and will use recourse in uk law within the next 7 days- THEY HAVE MADE ME ANGRY NOW:x -unless information held on me is made available. Furthermore the info commissioner is due to pay a visit to Abbey on 6 sept, to ascertain whether or not the microfiche rubbish is covered under dpa rules.

 

Quite simply if computer records are held on me i have the right to see them, i have already issued claims against hsbc and capital one, i shall have no hesitation to take abbey to court,not only for unfair charges but also wilful disregard for sar under dpa. GRRRRRRRRRRRRR:x

 

My advice is keep applying the pressure to these banks, remember we are now growing to be quite a thorn in the banking institutions derriere. LOL:grin:

hsbc

Claim served on 13-08-2006

 

full refund .19-08-2006,

23-08-06 cheque arrived £580-deal.:D

 

capital one .

Filed claim against 16-08-2006 for £340.

Capital one 02-09-06 offer £383 refund to account.deal:D

 

Abbey Data Protection Act 4-07-06

 

issued court claim for £189 16-10-06

waitng for allocation nov21-11-06:cool:

 

 

Pleae make a donation to site, when you win-- I DID

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...