Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Help need reclaiming PPI from Norton


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5395 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,

 

I took a loan out with Paragon about 4 years ago and when I came to recently ask how much was owing I was horrified to discover I somehow owed £8k more than I initially took out, despite never missing a payment of about £400 a month over 4 years!

 

I sent them a letter asking for all correspondence and when I received it I noticed that the PPI I had on the loan was added to the loan at the start and I was paying interest on that amount, which is largely why the amount I owe seemed to be far more than I thought it would be.

 

I contacted Paragon who told me I needed to speak to my broker - Norton finance. I did this and then sent a letter of complaint using one of the templates from this website to say that I felt I had been mis-sold the PPI as I was unaware it would be added to the loan amount and I would be paying interest.

 

I have just had a response which in a nutshell says "according to their records I was told everything they were legally obliged to tell me" and if I wanted to take it further I have to contact the Financial Ombudsman Service to make a complaint. (Incidently they also told me they had enclosed a leaflet from the Ombudsman with details of how to complain - it wasn't in the envelope - funny that..)

 

I just wanted to know what I should do from here. To me, telling me that "their records show" that I was told by the customer account manager that I would be charged interest etc does not suffice. Can I demand proof of this? Is it possible that they would be economical with the truth? I certainly don't recall being told this and Im sure if I had I would not have taken the loan out.

 

Also, they have enclosed a letter on Norton Finance headed paper with the heading "Important Info regarding your application for Optional PPI", which states quite clearly about the terms regarding the cost of the PPI and it being added to the loan amount etc. It is not a copy its newly printed out. I definitely did not receive this when I first took out the loan as I have all copies of everything I received and this was not one of them. Its almost as though they are trying to cover themselves by saying "well look you received one of these". But I didnt!

 

The only thing I have received from them that is a copy with my signature on is a "demands and Needs Statement" for PPI. Nowhere on this does it state about the cost of the PPI.

 

Clearly I want to take this further but I wanted some advice on how to do that and also, in peoples experience, is it worth me doing so given that Norton's stance is that their records show I was told all they were legally required to tell me.

If I should take it further, what is the most effective way for me to do this?

 

I would really appreciate any help as the amount I still owe makes me feel physically sick to think about it as I don't see how Im ever going to pay it off in my life time as it always seems to go up and not down!

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmmmmmm Jack Daniels.

 

Howdy Lady', welcome to the CAG.

Couple of things here. Sending a letter asking for all the correspondence, what exactly did they send you?

 

If it wasn't in an official capacity, ie a Subject Access Request, the chances are they'll just send you a statement.

So, if you havn't received a copy of your original contract, the terms, and notes on all information they hold against you, including notes added to your account etc then you should send off a SAR, this forces them by law to send you everything they have. You can find a template for that here :

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/payment-protection-insurance-ppi/118145-sar-ppi.html

 

If you send that off, you should be able to see what exactly it is in relation to : "according to their records I was told everything they were legally obliged to tell me".

You get all these notes, if you don't see anything that proves that they told you, you can write back to them with an official claim. Which they won't really have anything to argue against because if they still claim their records show you were told everything and you don't have evidence of that, then they havn't complied with the SAR, you would then write back to them with an official claim, then complain to the Ombundsman if they don't agree.

 

I wouldn't complain to the Ombundsman until you have sent off a SAR and looked through all your records and notes.

01/08/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - S.A.R sent

24/08/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - Statements Received

31/08/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - 1st Request sent

13/09/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - LBA sent

23/09/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - Offer received £1544 (Thanks but no thanks)

02/10/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - *WON* Full settlement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Lady JD:)

 

We also had PPI with Norton, although our lender wasn't Paragon. This was paid off some time ago.

 

We recently received our Subject Access Request and have approached Norton about the PPI which we believe was mis-sold and they have provided us with a copy of the recording made of the phone call in which the PPI was first mentioned to us. On the face of it therefore, it looks as if we have no chance of getting the PPI refunded.

 

Like yourself, they say in their letter that they sent us written documentation at the time showing the cost of the mortgage with and without the PPI. They also refer to their intention to do this on the recording. Like you we have all our original paperwork and we don't have anything showing this. They also sent us a copy of the Demands and Needs Statement, which as you say does not show the cost of the PPI let alone the cost without it.

 

As they obviously don't have a copy of a telephone call during which the PPI was sold - or I guess they would have provided you with this also, I don't see why you cannot take this further if you believe the PPI was mis-sold assuming you have good reasons for this - ie, you were retired, unemployed, had a pre-existing medical condition etc.

 

I certainly wouldn't give up at this stage if I was you.

 

As sleepz suggests, if you haven't already done a Subject Access Request it would be a good idea to do one.

 

Also, I should have read of the various stickies (at the top of the PPI forum) and other peoples' threads to glean as much knowledge about the mis-selling of PPI as you can.

 

Good luck!

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...