Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi welcome to the Forum.  If a PCN is sent out late ie after the 12th day of the alleged offence, the charge cannot then be transferred from the driver to the keeper.T he PCN is deemed to have arrived two days after dispatch so in your case, unless you can prove that Nexus sent the PCN several days after they claim you have very little chance of winning that argument. All is not lost since the majority of PCNs sent out are very poorly worded so that yet again the keeper is not liable to pay the charge, only the driver is now liable. If you post up the PCN, front and back we will be able to confirm whether it is compliant or not. Even if it is ok, there are lots of other reasons why it is not necessary to pay those rogues. 
    • Hi I received a Parking Charge letter to keeper on Monday 15/04/24, the 17th day after the alleged incident. My understanding is that this is outside the window for notifying. The issue date was 08/04/2024 which should have been in good time for it to have arrived within the notice period but in fact it actually arrived at lunchtime on the 15th. Do I have to prove when it arrived  (and if so how can I do that?) or is the onus on them to prove it was delivered in time? All I can find is that delivery is assumed to be on the second working day after issue which would have been Weds 10//04/24 but it was actually delivered 5 days later than that (thank you Royal Mail!). My husband was present when it arrived - is a family member witness considered sufficient proof? 1 Date of the infringement  arr 28/03/24 21:00, dep 29/03/24 01.27 2 Date on the NTK  08/04/2024 (Date of Issue) 3 Date received Monday 15/04/24 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012?  Yes 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No    Have you had a response?  n/a 7 Who is the parking company? GroupNexus 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Petrol Station Roadchef Tibshelf South DE55 5T 'operating in accordance with the BPA's Code of Practice'  
    • lookinforinfo - many thanks for your reply. It would be very interesting to get the letter of discontinuance. The court receptionist said that the county court was in Gloucester 'today' so that makes me think that some days it is in Gloucester and some days its in Cheltenham, it was maybe changed by the courts and i was never informed, who knows if DCBL were or not. My costs were a gallon of petrol and £3.40 for parking. I certainly don't want to end up in court again that's for sure but never say never lol. Its utterly disgusting the way these crooks can legally treat motorists but that's the uk for you. I'm originally from Scotland so it's good that they are not enforceable there but they certainly still try to get money out of you. I have to admit i have lost count of the pcn's i have received in the last 2 yr and 4 months since coming to England for work, most of them stop bothering you on their own eventually, it was just this one that they took it all the way. Like i mentioned in my WS the the likes of Aldi and other companies can get them cancelled but Mcdonalds refused to help me despite me being a very good customer.   brassednecked - many thanks   honeybee - many thanks   nicky boy - many thanks    
    • Huh? This is nothing about paying just for what I use - I currently prefer the averaged monthly payment - else i wouldn't be in credit month after month - which I am comfortable with - else I wold simply request a part refund - which I  would have done if they hadn't reduced my monthly dd after the complaint I raised (handled slowly and rather badly) highlighted the errors in their systems (one of which they do seem to have fixed) Are you not aware DD is always potentially variable? ah well, look it up - but my deal is a supposed to average the payments over a year, and i dont expect them to change payments (up or down) without my informed agreement ESPECIALLY when I'm in credit over winter.   You are happy with your smart meter - jolly for you I dont want one, dont have to have one  - so wont   I have a box that tells me my electricity usage - was free donkeys years ago and shows me everything I need to know just like a smart meter but doesnt need a smart meter,  and i can manually set my charges - so as a side effect - would show me if the charges from the supplier were mismatched. Doesn't tell me if the meters actually calibrated correctly - but neither does your smart meter. That all relies on a label and the competence of the testers - and the competence of any remote fiddling with the settings. You seem happy with that - thats fine. I'm not.    
    • Evening all,   So today, I was sent an updated offer that includes the £12.60 I spent on letters, but they have declined to add the interest at £7.40. They have stating 'We acknowledge your request to claim interest to date, however, this would be at the discretion of a trial judge if the claim did proceed to a trial hearing.' I think I am content with this outcome, and pushing this to a trial for a total interest of £15.30 throughout the claim does not make sense to me.   What are people's thoughts? I am sure our courts have better things to concentrate on?
  • 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

FirstPlus PPI misselling claim


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5324 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

 

Have been try to reclaim my ppi from FirstPlus for a while and they keep denying any misselling but will not give me a final response. This is my next letter can anyone take a look and please feel free to add or change it. Specifically can someone beef it up abit concerning differant laws and guidlines.

 

 

Dear Peter,

 

Thank you for your response about the mis-selling of your Payment Protection Insurance product. Frankly we are rather dismayed at your findings.

 

As most of your letter is about the 18 minute telephone conversation your Accounts Manager, P*** S****, had with my wife, let us deal with it first. During this telephone conversation my wife at three separate times answered Mr. S****s questions with the response “I don’t know”. He then proceeded to rephrase the question until he got the response he required. I was the one in the best position to answer questions about my earnings and work benefits.

 

This especially happened when he was discussing the Demands and Needs form. As he stated that, I as the highest wage earner in the household, was the only one covered for the Accident, Sickness and Unemployment part of the policy. You would think that I would be the one to answer the questions. But this would have slowed down the process of getting us to sign up quickly.

 

Mr. S**** asked my wife “Do you have payment protection insurance to specifically pay off this loan if your husband couldn’t work”. Well of course we did not. Who buys insurance to cover a loan if you don’t have the loan yet? This was the time Mr. S**** should have told us your PPI was not the only option for us.

 

As for the Demands and Needs form itself, it proves nothing except that your Accounts Manager filled it in. It certainly does not prove that your Payment Protection Insurance was the right policy for us. It has been well documented by official bodies like the Financial Ombudsman Service, that these types of forms are lender created forms not to actually understand anything, not to gain an insight but a form designed to be used as a means to an end and that end being “should the customer complain about mis-selling then we at least have the D & N on file”.

 

The D & N is all about box ticking and "being seen to do the right thing". Once let loose on the customer it was then all about getting the customer to sign. If anyone complained, you can then say "isolated incident", such and such is trained and qualified, this is our procedure etc etc . You missed the point - it was a chance to sell ethically, sell properly, not set up procedures to cover tracks when the real truth about Payment Protection Insurance came out.

 

Also at what point did the FSA, the OFT and the Competition Commissioner decide that a filled out D & N form was enough to make the PPI value for money and in the best interests of the consumer.

 

The telephone conversation proves nothing in First Plus’s favour other than you use a very subtle sales technique designed to confuse the customer and benefit your company. An example of this is that the repayment of the premium (£6735.75) is mentioned often, but the true fact of the insurance loan incurring massive amounts of interest over a 15 year period is quietly skirted over.

 

Also in this telephone conversation can you please pinpoint the time Mr. Smith told my wife that we could buy PPI insurance for this loan elsewhere, not just from First Plus. Can you also pinpoint the time that Mr. Smith told my wife about the 70% commission that First Plus received from our policy and we had to pay for and are still paying for through very high interest rates. If you cannot then First Plus could be in potential breach of law.

 

The average time across the PPI industry to recover the PPI premium would be well below the First Plus figure, so it was clearly designed to yield a profit at an unreasonable price.

 

The very fact that Payment Protection Insurance that was front loaded onto another loan was banned in May 2009, proves this sale in January 2007 of PPI is very questionable.

 

Simply put your PPI policy is worthless to me but very profitable for First Plus. The fact that First Plus have 99% of complaints to the FOS upheld also proves that your company is implementing a policy of “deny everything, always”.

 

I would like to thank you for highlighting specific points in the copies of your terms and conditions that you sent with you letter. May I take this opportunity to say that they were very helpful in finding the important parts of you T & C’s. It is just a pity that at the time you sold us the PPI your company sales department were not as conscientious and implemented an easy way to understand your T & C’s. This could have saved First Plus a great deal of money in mis-sold repayments.

 

All of the above clearly point to a badly advised sale of payment protection insurance and a continued damage limitation exercise on the part of First Plus.

 

Finally I request that you reply with either a final response or confirmation that you agree that you mis-sold the PPI. If you do neither then I will assume you do not wish this matter resolved and will therefore be submitting a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

 

We believe 21 days is more than enough time to respond for a company as well rehearsed in dealing with complaints as yourselves.

 

Yours sincerely

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't read through this but how long has your complaint been going on. If it has been 8 weeks then if they haven't given you their final respnse, you should complain directly to the FOS that you are being blocked.

 

If it is not 8 weeks then wait until the 8 week is up.

 

There is absolutely no point in getting bogged down in protracted exchnages with these people. Move on quickly. They will use dialogue to frustrate you and tire you out

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mac when did you first complain about the mis-sold PPI to first plus??

 

If it is more than 8 weeks ago and they have failed to give you a response to your claim then you can submit a claim for mis-selling to the Financial Ombudsman Service and leave it to them to make a formal adjudication on your claim.

 

If you decide to go down this route you will need to submit a complaint form and send copies of all the correspondence between you and firstplus up to the point of complaint. Here is the link for the FOS complaint....

 

Links that may help with your claim for Mis-sold PPI

Financial Ombudsman Service

 

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.u...-insurance.pdf

 

Do not give in keep up the pressure and keep copies of everything for the FOS.

 

aa

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

------------------------------------------------

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...