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
      • 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

CCA, sent now what about charges PPI


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5255 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 have sent yesterday one not a true CCA and now "in dispute" , and another to re-consider a write off waver, to same.

 

Two "in Dispute " letters for no response to CCA requests and to re-consider the write off waivers, to both.

 

Now while this is going on , I have noticed that the Duff cca (capquest) is only a application form for which i have now sent the "in dispute" letter, but i saw that the application has the self -employed box ticked off , and the PPI box as well.

 

Now do i await replys for the indispute letters etc first , or can I chase for miss-selling PPI on grounds that I was Self -employed , (apparently its worthless for the self-employed).

 

I have been sent some statements from CAPQUEST but they are all topsy-turvy on the order printed out on the same page ,some years before others and incomplete months.

 

The other two as mentioned i have had nothing from them whats, so ever .

 

Mind you its been very peaceful and quiet the last two months , By the way all CCA request all expired on the 7/9/2009, so they are a long way off time.

 

dozy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I have sent yesterday one not a true CCA and now "in dispute" , and another to re-consider a write off waver, to same.

 

Two "in Dispute " letters for no response to CCA requests and to re-consider the write off waivers, to both.

 

Now while this is going on , I have noticed that the Duff cca (capquest) is only a application form for which i have now sent the "in dispute" letter, but i saw that the application has the self -employed box ticked off , and the PPI box as well.

 

Now do i await replys for the indispute letters etc first , or can I chase for miss-selling PPI on grounds that I was Self -employed , (apparently its worthless for the self-employed).

 

I have been sent some statements from CAPQUEST but they are all topsy-turvy on the order printed out on the same page ,some years before others and incomplete months.

 

The other two as mentioned i have had nothing from them whats, so ever .

 

Mind you its been very peaceful and quiet the last two months , By the way all CCA request all expired on the 7/9/2009, so they are a long way off time.

 

dozy

 

I agree with cerberusalert. Sold PPI whilst self employed would IMO exclude you from making any claim on the PPI. The insurer would no doubt fail to pay up unless as self employed you could state your business was in administration or that you had to declare yourself bankrupt at which point no doubt there would be another exclusion in the small print.

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...