Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • JustAnOldGal
      Studio returns problems.

      By JustAnOldGal · Posted

      Sars request sent on 16th March and also sent a complaint separately to Studio. Have received no response. Both letters were received and signed for.  I was also told by the financial ombudsman that studio were investigating but I've also had no response to that either.  The only thing Studio have sent me is a default notice.  Any ideas of what I can do from here please 
    • grumpy59
      eBay parcel worth £265, booked via Parcel 2 Go, 'lost' by Evri

      By grumpy59 · Posted

      Thanks Bank - I shall tweak my draft and repost. And here's today's ridiculous email from the P2G 'Claims Dept' Good Morning,  Thank you for you email. Unfortunately we would be unable to pay the amount advised in your previous email.  When you placed the order, you were asked for the value of your parcel, you stated that the value was £265.00. At this stage the booking advised that you were covered to £20.00 and to enhance this to £260.00 you could pay an extra £13.99 + VAT to fully cover your item for loss or damage during transit, you declined to fully cover your item.  Towards the end of your booking on the confirmation page, you were then offered to take cover again, to which you declined again.  Unfortunately, we would be unable to offer you an enhanced payment on this occasion.  If I can assist further, please do let me know.  Kindest Regards Claims Team and my response Good Afternoon  Do you not understand the court cases of PENCHEV v P2G (225MC852) and SMIRNOVS v P2G (27MC729)? In both cases it was held by the courts that there was no need for additional ‘cover’ or ‘protection’ (or whatever you wish to call it) on top of the standard delivery charge, and P2G were required to pay up in full for both cases, which by then also included court costs and interest. I shall be including copies of both those judgements in the bundle I submit to the court next Wednesday 1 May, unless you settle my claim (£274.10) in full before then. Tick tock…..    
    • UsedCarMan
      Lowell/Shoes SPC Claim Forfar Sheriff Court - Old Newday Credit Card.

      By UsedCarMan · Posted

      IMG_2820-IMG_2820-merged.pdfmerged.pdf Case management was this morning. Here is the Sheriff’s order. Moved case forward to 24/05.   He said there was no signed agreement and after a bit of “erm, erm, yeah but, erm” when he asked them, he allowed time for sol to contact claimant.  what is the next step now? thank you UCM  
    • lolerz
      my Leasehold/Freehold property and it's issues.

      By lolerz · Posted

      I've had a quick (well, quick for a thread of this length),  read of this thread and to be honest I'm struggling to make heads nor tails of the actual crux of the issue here. You seem awfully convinced that whatever is going on is worth the fight and the odds are in your favour but with how the thread has gone it seems that one trail goes cold so you simply move on to another in an attempt to delay the inevitable. All it does is end up digging holes and confusing others and yourself which means any advice given to you is completely pointless. I note that for the life of this thread there has not been any documentation or correspondence uploaded for people to have a look. Have you got any that you'd be willing to redact and upload for members to assist you? Right now, it seems people are shooting out advice while being in the dark because it's starting to become very difficult for people who weren't here at the start of this (including myself) to follow along. Right now, this whole thread is just hypothetical "He said, she said" and is going nowhere fast. Nothing more than basic advice can be given which, as you've sought out some legal advice, is likely not sufficient to actually come to any sort of conclusion. I, personally, am starting to agree with others that it may be best to consider bankruptcy and put the matter behind you.  
    • Coleman0123
      MET PCN claimform - occupants left Southgate premises - Southgate Carpark Stansted

      By Coleman0123 · Posted

      Thank you. Fingers crossed it is all over soon. 

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Supreme court rules

Consumer dude

By Consumer dude
in General

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5203 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

lovejoy

lovejoy

Posted
Posted
Well said, they were fined 28 million pounds, if you take advantage of an unauthorised overdraft you too will pay a penalty, if they write to you telling you so you will pay for their letter. However, if you stuck to the terms and conditions of the Bank you won't pay any penalties, simple really.

 

If I put in my T&C's that I will hit you over the head with a hammer if you fail to do X or Y it doesn't mean that I can get away with it, hitting you over the head with a hammer is still wrong.

All we are saying is the banks are wrong and so far have failed to prove otherwise.

I will continue to screw these immoral, greedy bankers any way I can.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 360
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

TenaciousC

TenaciousC

Posted
Posted
Being positive and keeping up the fight is obligatory. However, if you can hold the **** in the Supreme Court in anything other than a negative light over this decision, then I have serious reservations about your thought processes. The decision was bent. Your comments seemed to hint at something like 'oh, the Supreme Court weren't so mean after all. They are 'guiding' us down another path'. Absolute tosh.

 

I have serious reservations about your thought processes.
I think maybe spend a bit of time reassessing your own thoughts.

 

The decision was bent.
That was my first thoughts, but I thought about it for a while, maybe it was maybe it wasn't, but I wasn't there so can't reliably comment on that.

 

Your comments seemed to hint at something like 'oh, the Supreme Court weren't so mean after all. They are 'guiding' us down another path'.
If you look at it in anyway other than doom and gloom, you can see some possibility that this might be a blessing in disguise. After all, all is not lost now.

 

Absolute tosh.
Well you're entitled to your opinion.

 

In all honestly, I would love, absolutely love to see the banks pay. It would be no less than they deserve. they made my life a misery only 6 years ago, treat others as you would have others treat you.. go stomp all over them!

Link to post
Share on other sites
adamc6671

adamc6671

Posted
Posted

Despite all that has been said here today, there seems to me to be a lot of positives in this - see Bankfodder's Global Announcement for example, and the un-freezing of claims.

 

In my view, the dust needs to settle, and the legal experts, both here and elsewhere, need time to fully assess the judgement, turn it into English that we can all understand, and then advise us on the best course of action to take from here.

 

It seems to me that there is VERY likely to be a positive way forward, and we just need to wait for that expert advice - after all, a few days or weeks on top of the large ammount of time that has passed already is hardly significant! As someone else has already said, where else can you get 8% these days!

I do my best to be helpful, but at the end of the day I'm not a professional - please seek further advice if you're not sure. On the other hand, if I have helped, please click my scales - thanks ;)

 

Current Claims (all for friends!) -

 

Abbey - over £4k - Court claim issued & AQ filed ('Tish vs Abbey'). Alloc'n Hearing 21 Sept - Claim stayed 29/8/07.

Cap One - just under £2k - WON (just over 2k!)('Tish vs Cap One')

Cap One - just under £1000 - WON (just over £1k) Nov 07 (JimmyBoy vs Cap One)

Lloyds TSB - £3.5k - Court claim issued, defence rec'd and AQ filed; Alloc'n hearing 7th Sept Claim stayed 29/8/07! (JimmyBoy vs Lloyds')

MBNA - over £1k for mis-sold PPI - WON - approx £1500(IpswichWitch vs MBNA . . .)

Link to post
Share on other sites
renegotiation

renegotiation

Posted
Posted
I think maybe spend a bit of time reassessing your own thoughts.

 

That was my first thoughts, but I thought about it for a while, maybe it was maybe it wasn't, but I wasn't there so can't reliably comment on that.

 

If you look at it in anyway other than doom and gloom, you can see some possibility that this might be a blessing in disguise. After all, all is not lost now.

 

Well you're entitled to your opinion.

 

In all honestly, I would love, absolutely love to see the banks pay. It would be no less than they deserve. they made my life a misery only 6 years ago, treat others as you would have others treat you.. go stomp all over them!

 

Look, I am angry and maybe was a little biting in my comments. However, it is so obvious the ruling was bent. You must know that deep down I think. You are quite right about uniting and fighting, but do so in the knowledge of how bent our whole system of government is. Don't make any excuses for those tossers! ;)

 

Breaking news - banks say all claims are terminated!

What sort of world do you want your kids to grow up in?

Link to post
Share on other sites
TenaciousC

TenaciousC

Posted
Posted
Look, I am angry and maybe was a little biting in my comments. However, it is so obvious the ruling was bent. You must know that deep down I think. You are quite right about uniting and fighting, but do so in the knowledge of how bent our whole system of government is. Don't make any excuses for those tossers! ;)

 

If you read my earlier posts from this morning you'll notice I already said about the corruption part....

 

I'm not defending the ruling, lords or the banks, I am merely saying, deep in there somewhere is some hint at our next move.. and it was given to us (perhaps unwittingly) by the Lords themselves.

They gave away that we and the OFT should perhaps try a different route.

 

And I'm sure that's what the OFT et al will be doing too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
meagain

meagain

Posted
Posted
I'm shocked at this ruling.

 

What horse trading shenanigans went on behind the scenes???

 

Refusing them leave to appeal as well, this well and truly stinks of something:mad:

 

The Court of Appeal denied the banks leave to appeal the case to the House of Lords, but they did so anyway.

 

In any case, the judgment does not mean what you seem to think it means. Read these first.

  • Haha 1

HSBC • Lloyds TSB • contractual interest • New Tax Credits • coming for you? • NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites
renegotiation

renegotiation

Posted
Posted
[breaking news - banks say all claims are terminated![/

 

Where?

 

BBC NEWS 24. That was read out verbatim et literatim by a reporter who seemed to be reading from a statement issued by the banks. Maybe Angela Knight didn't have the balls to read it herself. :D

What sort of world do you want your kids to grow up in?

Link to post
Share on other sites
TenaciousC

TenaciousC

Posted
Posted
BBC NEWS 24. That was read out verbatim et literatim by a reporter who seemed to be reading from a statement issued by the banks. Maybe Angela Knight didn't have the balls to read it herself. :D

 

Courtesy of the unique way the BBC is funded!

 

Does the government have any bearing on how the BBC operates I wonder?

Link to post
Share on other sites
veester

veester

Posted
Posted

Of course the possibility is that all these new terms will mean...if we get any charges back under clauses mentioned previously, then any assesment of repayment of historical charges will mean significant reduction, so £800 under the new "correct" and "fair charging" regime will probably mean you get back a lot less than £800, say £400.

 

......"financial engineering"....as somone quoted...

 

maybe....

Veester

 

"Challenges are what make life interesting; overcoming them is what makes life meaningful." -- Joshua J. Marine‏ ;)

 

Better than the truth itself is truthful living.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
renegotiation

renegotiation

Posted
Posted
If you read my earlier posts from this morning you'll notice I already said about the corruption part....

 

I'm not defending the ruling, lords or the banks, I am merely saying, deep in there somewhere is some hint at our next move.. and it was given to us (perhaps unwittingly) by the Lords themselves.

They gave away that we and the OFT should perhaps try a different route.

 

And I'm sure that's what the OFT et al will be doing too.

 

This is my take on it. The Supreme Court was trying to save some face and the OFT won't take on another case. The British Bull**** Corporation is already sending out subtle messages that the 'OFT might not have the heart for another case'. Maybe they have been brought into line? We'll see won't we...

 

 

Courtesy of the unique way the BBC is funded!

 

Does the government have any bearing on how the BBC operates I wonder?

 

Our corrupt system does.

What sort of world do you want your kids to grow up in?

Link to post
Share on other sites
speedtrip

speedtrip

Posted
Posted

Hey this is a very emotive sujbect and when I first heard the decision I was shocked.

 

I might be wrong but maybe the judge is being a bit clever as the banks have got away on a technicality but there seems to be other options. Maybe the OFT missed a trick here ... i dont know.

 

Think about this for a moment the Govt have piled a lot of money into the banks (our money) and approx 1/3 of the banking industry revenue comes from bank charges. If they lose that it will take longer for them to pay the Govt Loans back ... see where i am coming from.

 

Maybe there was pressure brought upon the SC to use this technicality but maybe the judge has pointed the way forward.

 

In real terms I suspect a million disgruntled customers is a small % of the total banking population and we could be in the minority because most people do not like complaining and lets faces it hardly easy to make a claim is it.

 

If this is successful the model we will end up with will be accounts that have annual charges attached to them and the FSA/Govt/Consumer Groups will agree a fair price guideline for the services.

 

ST

RBS/Triton - Gone Away No CCA

RBS/Moorcroft - Gone way No CCA

RBS/AIC - Gone Away No CCA

RBS/Intrum - Gone Away No CCA

RBS/Regal - Gone Away

 

Cahoot/Link - CCA in Dispute

 

Capital One - Settled

 

Lloyds Bank - Awaiting Outcome from Supreme Court Hearing.

 

Lloyds Credit Credit - Repayment Plan

Link to post
Share on other sites
TenaciousC

TenaciousC

Posted
Posted
This is my take on it. The Supreme Court was trying to save some face and the OFT won't take on another case. The British Bull**** Corporation is already sending out subtle messages that the 'OFT might not have the heart for another case'. Maybe they have been brought into line? We'll see won't we...

 

Pitchforks, torches and Pikes it is then!

Link to post
Share on other sites
meagain

meagain

Posted
Posted
BBC NEWS 24. That was read out verbatim et literatim by a reporter who seemed to be reading from a statement issued by the banks.

 

If the BBC haven't simply read it out and attributed it to an appropriate source, or if they expand or editorialize on this without correcting it, phone the BBC Duty Office immediately to complain.

HSBC • Lloyds TSB • contractual interest • New Tax Credits • coming for you? • NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites
renegotiation

renegotiation

Posted
Posted
Pitchforks, torches and Pikes it is then!

 

Hmm, metaphorically. We need a well organised huge march. :) The powers that be would love a riot and use it to their own advantage. They even use agent provocateurs when it suits them. We'll have to see what Bankfodder, Dave and the site team think. We'd need inter site cooperation and a massive media campaign.

 

 

If the BBC haven't simply read it out and attributed it to an appropriate source, or if they expand or editorialize on this without correcting it, phone the BBC Duty Office immediately to complain.

 

She said 'the banks said'...

What sort of world do you want your kids to grow up in?

Link to post
Share on other sites
TenaciousC

TenaciousC

Posted
Posted
Hmm, metaphorically. We need a well organised huge march. :) The powers that be would love a riot and use it to their own advantage. They even use agent provocateurs when it suits them. We'll have to see what Bankfodder, Dave and the site team think. We'd need inter site cooperation and a massive media campaign.

 

 

Media help in our favour would help that tremendously.

 

Where does one find that sort of cooperation? The Sun, Daily Mail?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Wethers82

Wethers82

Posted
Posted

" The brutal truth though seems to be that the claims for refunds of past charges, whether at the banks, in the courts or with the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) are dead in the water. "

 

The exact words of the BBC website.

 

I don't care what is said, there is no chance in hell they are going to get me to pay back £1,500 worth of interest, baring in mind they failed to pay back the full amount I requested 3 years ago! they paid me £100 less and now my charges have built up again due to their failure.

 

I'm taking this stance- they can drag me to the court room and they can threaten me with a jail sentence, but they will not be getting a penny out of me. Who's with me?! :mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites
TenaciousC

TenaciousC

Posted
Posted
" The brutal truth though seems to be that the claims for refunds of past charges, whether at the banks, in the courts or with the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) are dead in the water. "

 

The exact words of the BBC website.

 

I don't care what is said, there is no chance in hell they are going to get me to pay back £1,500 worth of interest, baring in mind they failed to pay back the full amount I requested 3 years ago! they paid me £100 less and now my charges have built up again due to their failure.

 

I'm taking this stance- they can drag me to the court room and they can threaten me with a jail sentence, but they will not be getting a penny out of me. Who's with me?! :mad:

 

But surely if they already paid you back some money they have admitted something was amiss in a roundabout way.. it's all twisted isn't it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
renegotiation

renegotiation

Posted
Posted
Media help in our favour would help that tremendously.

 

Where does one find that sort of cooperation? The Sun, Daily Mail?

 

The site already has plenty of media experience. We'll have to wait and see what the site team think about a march. I'll start a thread and see what the interest is.

 

Even Martin Lewis sounded angry. I didn't know he was capable. :lol::lol::lol:

What sort of world do you want your kids to grow up in?

Link to post
Share on other sites
meagain

meagain

Posted
Posted
Media help in our favour would help that tremendously.

 

Where does one find that sort of cooperation? The Sun, Daily Mail?

 

Worth a try. One thing we don't have is the BBC. I'm told that the radio bulletins on 1 and 2 have repeatedly stated, without qualification, that the banks won't have to pay up. Not heard them myself, so can't really take it on.

HSBC • Lloyds TSB • contractual interest • New Tax Credits • coming for you? • NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites
Consumer dude

Consumer dude

Posted
  • Author
Posted
" The brutal truth though seems to be that the claims for refunds of past charges, whether at the banks, in the courts or with the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) are dead in the water. "

 

The exact words of the BBC website.

 

I don't care what is said, there is no chance in hell they are going to get me to pay back £1,500 worth of interest, baring in mind they failed to pay back the full amount I requested 3 years ago! they paid me £100 less and now my charges have built up again due to their failure.

 

I'm taking this stance- they can drag me to the court room and they can threaten me with a jail sentence, but they will not be getting a penny out of me. Who's with me?! :mad:

 

 

 

 

Your quite right, people will just say get stuffed or words to that effect..

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...