Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • ROFL - says a minister of the government that lets its politicians promote their agendas unchallenged and well paid on the UK's version of Russia Today translated UK deputy PM launches global push to mask their election rigging "The UK is following Russia and China on a government minister and MP led process to get paid vast sums to put our message out to the plebs unchallenged, funded via right wing billionaires, AI from foreign states, and misuse of taxpayer money.   reuters.com WWW.REUTERS.COM  
    • Yes, but the process starts here... https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/data-protection-complaints/what-to-expect/ This involves making a complaint to GS first before approaching ICO. However, at the time of the complaint, I beleive we'd advise the complainant to ask for some compensation and take it from there. @FTMDave?? No, I meant this forum, The Consumer Action Group, where you're posting right now.😄 (We're in the slow process of rebranding as The National Consumer Service.)
    • And yes, they state their client is EON and that they can return the debt to EON who can either register a default or take me to court. 
    • Thank you. The npower debt was from 2019/2020 until EON took over the account late 2021.   npower had set a DCA on me even though I owed them nothing. I spoke to a customer service agent, following up by email, who confirmed I was in credit . I made a complaint to head office who sent a barrage of emails, changing the amounts each time. According to them, I owed £279.   The debt grew to what it is now as first npower and then EON subsequently failed to put a payment arrangement and direct debit in place to pay off this supposed sum and my ongoing bills.   I was very ill with Covid, struggling in lockdown with a disabled child and informed them of all this.   EON stopped their legal action when I took them to the ombudsman as this was part of my complaint and requested remedy but I have not received a notice of discontinuance.    I would like to set up my own dd to pay them off but am concerned they could still take legal action. I am on a low income and can’t afford to pay them more than a token amount each month.   
    • Thank you guys! @lookinforinfo thank you for the case, it seem to similar with my case which is gold. @Nicky Boy shouldn't be ICO?   Personal data breaches: a guide ICO.ORG.UK   For CAG I found this  The Confidentiality Advisory Group (CAG) is an independent body which provides expert advice on the use of confidential patient information. This includes providing advice to us, the Health Research Authority (HRA) for research uses. It also provides advice to the Secretary of State for Health for non-research uses.
  • 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

Welcome/Norwich Union PPI.


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1938 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 everyone,I complained to Welcome Finance in August re PPI,today I received a letter from them (Final Response) they state that my complaint "is outside the relevent time limit).

They go on to say that"The rules of our regulator (FSA) state that where a complaint relates to an event that took place before 27 February 2003 we are not required to investigate your complaint.Sales of insurance made before this date were the responsibility of the insurance provider,not the broker who sold it.

They say as a result they have not investigated my complaint,and if I am not happy with their decision I should deal with the FOS..within six months.

Any help please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi ims21,

I've made a couple of phone calls to the FSA,

they gave me a number for the FOS and after explaining my dilemma they agreed to investigate my complaint.

I've scanned all the relevent doc's and e-mailed them off to them.

 

By the way i looked up section 32 on the gov' website,

surely the part on the thread you pointed me to,

and incidently Bankfodder's view when he replied to a thread of mine (28/4/11) brushes aside all the protests that these companies make regarding claims being out of date.

 

Time to sit back and see what the FOS make of it.

 

Thanks for your help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi ims,

Not very good news I'm afraid.

 

I received a call from the FOS,

they said that at that time Welcome did not come under their jurisdiction and that I should contact the FSCS.

 

When I phoned them up they said that they could not investigate any claims prior to 14/1/2005 and that I should go back to the FOS

,I even quoted the Limitations Act(sect 32)

 

They had no knowledge of it, and again said I should phone the FOS which I have done and I'm waiting for a call back.

I have the distinct impression that the people at the FSCS are reading from a script,if you are inside their time constraints ,no problem,however if you're outside of it they don't want to know.

 

Does anybody have another way forward that I can take.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just been looking at an article in Martin Lewis' moneysavingexpert.com.(updated 25/10/11)

 

In it he states

"If your account was still active in the last six years you can claim.

So a loan taken out eleven years ago and repaid in full five years ago is fine,

in rare cases you can go back further"

 

Do any of the SITE TEAM have any views regarding this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 years later...

Hi everyone,

I recently received a letter from Welcome Finance which stated...

" I am writing to you regarding the complaint you made regarding mis-sold Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) which we responded on 23/08/11.

 

Whilst we were unable to agree you were mis-sold PPI on account number(s) xxxxxx and your complaint was rejected, in line with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) policy statement PS17/3 issued in March 2017, you can now make a further complaint against Welcome Financial Services Limited under section 140A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, in relation to it's failure to disclose commissions associated with PPI sold to you ".

 

The problem that I have is after they rejected my claim I phoned the Ombudsman and was told that it was not possible to pursue Welcome for PPi. When I was told that I destroyed all the doc's relating to the loan, these included the original loan application, the terms of the loan and PPI details.

 

In view of this new letter from Welcome will I now be able to pursue them for the PPI plus interest that they owe me.

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive merged your old thread for history

 

Youll find this new letter is to do with the recent plevin ruling about the backhander commission hey got for selling the ppi for the underwriter

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks dx100uk, Took me a bit of time to understand what you did.

 

What I'm really trying to find out is do I have a chance at getting back my PPI from these slippery people.

 

How much of a factor is it whether or not they were members of the General Insurance Standards Council. Also is it worth firing off a SAR.

 

I've just been on the Welcome website and found the following under FAQ'S......

......I says that the FSCS declared Welcome in default, because it's unable or likely to be able to pay claims in relation to PPI etc.

 

Later it goes on to say that the FSCS is now responsible for PPI and other insurance claims against WFSL sold on or after 14/01/05...

 

.this seems to be saying that all claims prior to that are null and void....what is the deciding figure that makes them set a certain date for proper and improper conduct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're not getting back your ppi but their commission under the new FCA plevin ruling

Go read post 39 again

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Today

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still trying to get my head around this...

 

I had a quick look at PS17-03 and Plevin but but it's not exactly a quick read, but I could not find a date beyond which you could not claim.

 

Also are you saying that WFSL are not liable now for any PPI they mis-sold and that I must discover who was their insurance broker and chase them or are the FSCS taking over the compensation (this seems unlikely).

Or is the bottom that I should just write it off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:noidea:Not really sure what you are not simply understanding...

The plevin ruling on Commission paid to the OCwas only 2yrs ago

there is no time limit on something the FCA did only 2 yrs ago!!!!!

 

It is nothing to do with any ppi claims now or in the past.....other than it was refused

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It explains eveything in their letter

Doesnt ask you to do anything other than put a claim inh

 

We want to give you money that FCA have ruled we must but we need your ok to do so....

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks dx100uk,

Put that way it does seem pretty straightforward, I just got off the phone to the Ombudsman and they suggested that I asked WFSL to look into the "commission aspect" of the deal. Does that make sense to you, also is there a template letter that addresses this matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...