Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

outrage over new bank charges


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5317 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

In a clear-cut case of anti-British discrimination, the partially taxpayer-owned bank Lloyds TSB charges British people £200 for an overdraft and Muslims £15 for the same facility, it has been revealed.

The disparity has come about as a result of the introduction of Sharia banking by Lloyds and other banks in response to the Islamic colonisation of Britain.

This Muslim colonisation of Britain has, in turn, been caused by the Third World invasion immigration policies pursued by Tory and Labour governments.

The “Islamic account” offered by Lloyds TSB was set up to attract Muslim customers by “allowing them to keep faithful to their religion.” Apparently, Sharia law does not permit the payment of interest so the Islamic account at Lloyds TSB has been set up without an overdraft facility. No interest is charged on Islamic accounts, while customers with a normal account are hit with charges of up to £200 if they go overdrawn.

If a Muslim customer who has insufficient funds in the account tries to make a payment, it is blocked and a “return item fee” is charged.

However, on some Islamic accounts such a payment is authorised and an “unplanned overdraft fee” of £15 is then levied. The bank says this is a management fee, not a payment of interest, so does not contradict Sharia law.

Non-Muslim customers who go into the red without authorisation are fined with an “unplanned overdraft fee” of £20 a day for a maximum of ten days, plunging them into a £200 debt which is avoided by Muslim customers.

* There is good news: the “Islamic account” is available to all customers at Lloyds TSB. This bank needs to be taught a lesson for their initial exploitation of overdraft fees and their blatant anti-British discrimination.

The one way to do this is for all Lloyds TSB customers reading this story to go down to their branch and demand that their account be made into an “Islamic account.”

If enough people do this, the banks will not be able to steal as much money from the public as they would like. It will also send a message to the banking community that more and more people are sick and tired of their blatant discrimination.

All other High Street banks offer Sharia banking as well and there is no reason why all customers cannot suddenly claim to be Muslim and open these sorts of banking accounts to teach all the banks a lesson in people power.

Earlier this month, it emerged that ‘losses’ at Lloyds had escalated to £13.4 billion. It has already been bailed out by the taxpayer to the tune of £17 billion and is 43 percent taxpayer-owned

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 140
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

no i cant ... and even if i could . why have a diffrant rule because of your own religion

Why can't you open one?

There is no religious test to opening the bank account. There is no discrimination because of race creed or colour.

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why can't you open one?

There is no religious test to opening the bank account. There is no discrimination because of race creed or colour.

 

 

well we shall see if i can change my account ..i guess that you cant just change for the sake of not getting any charges

 

but there is discrimination on religious grounds

Link to post
Share on other sites

well we shall see if i can change my account ..i guess that you cant just change for the sake of not getting any charges

You can't change the type of account you have but you can open an account and move your payments over.

The £15.00 fee is not entirely correct since you can be charged unpaid fees. I saw the article elsewhere and read through the charges bit.

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't change the type of account you have but you can open an account and move your payments over.

The £15.00 fee is not entirely correct since you can be charged unpaid fees. I saw the article elsewhere and read through the charges bit.

 

from there site : Islamic-Account-Lloyds.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

lets get this right and call me a racist if you want

i dont care

 

there is only one law in this country

 

its called the houses of parliment and the house of lords

 

we cut off a kings head for these rights

 

how dare any company bring in this sharia law which by any standards is barbaric

 

public stoning and beheading for instance

 

how is the goverment etc allowing this

 

this is europe, not the middle east

 

the rule of law as laid down by magna carter is for every one

 

all faiths

 

 

we are now becomming a split society thanks to the pc brigade

 

this has to stop

Link to post
Share on other sites

And the source of this particular piece of crap?

 

Well, I had guessed it, but just for confirmation:

 

Taxpayer-Owned Bank Overdraft Fees: British Customers Pay £200, Muslims £15 : The British National Party :rolleyes:

 

PS: How can it be "clear-cut anti-British discrimination", when a large proportion of born and bred Brits are in fact Muslim? :lol::rolleyes::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the terms in which Sparks199 expresses himself to be utterly repugnant. There has been no Islamic colonisation of Britain. When anyone applies to be allowed into Britain his religion, quite rightly, is not taken into consideration. Since most of the Muslims applying for a sharia account will be British, I fail to see how there are can be any anti-British discrimination. Further, being a Muslim, or indeed of any religion, is not incompatible with being British.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

And the source of this particular piece of crap?

 

Well, I had guessed it, but just for confirmation:

 

Taxpayer-Owned Bank Overdraft Fees: British Customers Pay £200, Muslims £15 : The British National Party :rolleyes:

 

PS: How can it be "clear-cut anti-British discrimination", when a large proportion of born and bred Brits are in fact Muslim? :lol::rolleyes::lol:

 

this has nothing to do with racist

 

dont play that card ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and it is nothing new, early CAGgers reported on this 3 yrs ago, when someone noticed it (can't remember which bank though).

 

And just to add to the controversy a tad, I'm afraid it has nothing to do with PC or not, but with free market. If you don't like Barclays dealings with Zimbabwe and supporting Mugabe's regime, then you bank elsewhere. If it helps you sleep better believing Co-op's claims they are "ethical", then you bank with them.

 

Please let's not make this a race or religion issue when there is none. If we ALL had to bank according to Sharia law, then you'd have reasons to moan. In the meantime, each to their own. Maybe my bank charges me more for going overdrawn, but at least I don't risk getting stoned to death for disagreeing with my husband, thank you very much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the terms in which Sparks199 expresses himself to be utterly repugnant. There has been no Islamic colonisation of Britain. When anyone applies to be allowed into Britain his religion, quite rightly, is not taken into consideration. Since most of the Muslims applying for a sharia account will be British, I fail to see how there are can be any anti-British discrimination. Further, being a Muslim, or indeed of any religion, is not incompatible with being British.

 

 

but why have that account .. when its clear that its on religious grounds

 

why should 1 account charge x amount and the other charge x amount

Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact it was the Daily Mail who published the article first(yesterday) and the BNP that took a BNP view to it this morning. Not the other way round.

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

this has nothing to do with racist

 

dont play that card ...

It has EVERYTHING to do with racism. :-? The BNP is making it so. "anti-British discrimination".

 

Oh ok, it's not racism, it's xenophobia. It's just the BNP doesn't use that word often because most of its members probably don't understand its meaning, least of all how to spell it. :rolleyes:

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In a clear-cut case of anti-British discrimination, the partially taxpayer-owned bank Lloyds TSB charges British people £200 for an overdraft and Muslims £15 for the same facility, it has been revealed.

The disparity has come about as a result of the introduction of Sharia banking by Lloyds and other banks in response to the Islamic colonisation of Britain.

This Muslim colonisation of Britain has, in turn, been caused by the Third World invasion immigration policies pursued by Tory and Labour governments.

The “Islamic account” offered by Lloyds TSB was set up to attract Muslim customers by “allowing them to keep faithful to their religion.” Apparently, Sharia law does not permit the payment of interest so the Islamic account at Lloyds TSB has been set up without an overdraft facility. No interest is charged on Islamic accounts, while customers with a normal account are hit with charges of up to £200 if they go overdrawn.

If a Muslim customer who has insufficient funds in the account tries to make a payment, it is blocked and a “return item fee” is charged.

However, on some Islamic accounts such a payment is authorised and an “unplanned overdraft fee” of £15 is then levied. The bank says this is a management fee, not a payment of interest, so does not contradict Sharia law.

Non-Muslim customers who go into the red without authorisation are fined with an “unplanned overdraft fee” of £20 a day for a maximum of ten days, plunging them into a £200 debt which is avoided by Muslim customers.

* There is good news: the “Islamic account” is available to all customers at Lloyds TSB. This bank needs to be taught a lesson for their initial exploitation of overdraft fees and their blatant anti-British discrimination.

The one way to do this is for all Lloyds TSB customers reading this story to go down to their branch and demand that their account be made into an “Islamic account.”

If enough people do this, the banks will not be able to steal as much money from the public as they would like. It will also send a message to the banking community that more and more people are sick and tired of their blatant discrimination.

All other High Street banks offer Sharia banking as well and there is no reason why all customers cannot suddenly claim to be Muslim and open these sorts of banking accounts to teach all the banks a lesson in people power.

Earlier this month, it emerged that ‘losses’ at Lloyds had escalated to £13.4 billion. It has already been bailed out by the taxpayer to the tune of £17 billion and is 43 percent taxpayer-owned

 

I see where the BNP view comes from, a copy and paste from their site. Poor choice of article sparks since the Daily Mail article would have been a better choice and is already posted on the forum.

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see where the BNP view comes from, a copy and paste from their site. Poor choice of article sparks since the Daily Mail article would have been a better choice and is already posted on the forum.

 

 

look again ....the article came from the Daily Mail article

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...