Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • ah - here it is - .. Yesterday UK finance minister: Thames Water must sort out its own issues "I make no comment on Thames because they need to sort out their own issues," Hunt told reporters during a visit to Washington when asked what a government-led administration process for Thames Water could do for investors' confidence in Britain. "What we're never going to do for people who invest in the UK, is say that the state is going to insure you against bad decisions made by management or shareholders. That's what markets are about."   reuters.com WWW.REUTERS.COM       So was the chancellor not informed of this massive encompassing plan ..  or was he lying/misleading Today: Thames Water nationalisation plan could move bulk of £15bn debt to state   Thames Water nationalisation plan could move bulk of £15bn debt to state | Thames Water | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Exclusive: Under Whitehall blueprint for water company some lenders could lose up to 40% of their money  
    • Hi everyone, appreciate your help in this. Today (18/04/2024) I received a "Parking charge - Keeper liability notice for Royale Leisure Park - W3" stating that I "parked without clearly displaying a valid PCM UK Ltd permit. The car was parked on the 8th of March 2024 at the car park for Park Royal Leisure Park in London. The letter stated that a notice to keep was sent 28 days ago, but I have not received any charge letter or ticket.  I don't know what permit they are talking about. The leisure park does not have tickets, it has free parking for 5 hours- this is clearly stated on their website. Furthermore, I think the Parking Charge is invalid because, on March 8th, I was a customer at Royale Leisure Park, where I attended to watch a movie at the Odeon Cinema. I can prove my purchase of the ticket. The Royal Leisure Park has free parking for 5 hours as stated on their website (see attached screenshot), so they should not have given me the charge in the first place. Should I contact them to state that I should not have been given a charge? I'm concerned about the charge rising if I don't contact them.  Your advice is greatly appreciated.  Thank you.   parking rules park royal.pdf 2024-04-12 PCM NTK event 2024-03-08.pdf
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Welcome Finance - Termination: Your Rights


gettingthere
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3314 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

My son in law bought a car which was financed through Welcome Car Finance. It seems he was also 'persuaded' to purchase Mechanical Breakdown Insurance and Shortfall Extra Insurance. The cost of the insurances were added to his loan.

 

Figures shown on credit agreement are as follows:

 

Amount of credit for goods: £8595.00

Amount of credit for insurances £850

Total amount of credit £9445.00

 

Duration of agreement 48 months

 

Total amount payable for goods £12172.40

Total amount payable for insurances £1203.84

Total amount payable £13376.24

 

 

He has now made 22 monthly payments of £278.63 without missing any.

He decided to exercise his right to terminate the agreement . On page 2 of the credit agreement there is a box which has a figure of £6085.70 in it - it states 'if you have already paid at least this amount plus any overdue instalments and have taken reasonable care of the goods, you will not have to pay any more'.

 

He has paid £6129.86 so sent a termination letter. They have replied saying that he still owes the following:

 

Seperate Agreement Labilities £651.96 (Insurance)

£506.55 (Goods)

 

My simple question is can they do this when the figure in the box clearly says that once £6085.70 has been paid the goods can be handed back.

 

In their letter they refer to the agreement as a 'Multiple' Agreement section 18 Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

I can see where they get their figures from but surely the 50% box should show a correct figure - their figure shows only 50% of the goods and not 50% of the whole agreement?

 

We really need to know where to go from here as I can see Welcome coming back to him after they have collected the car for the whole amount payable under the agreement ie £13376.24.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Further to my original post the plot thickens re this agreement.

 

The original paperwork has now been dug out: we have now found the original invoice from welcome car finance. This shows that the purchase price of the vehicle was £7300.00 plus £299.00 for extras (we have no idea what the extras were) less £1.00 part Exchange Allowance giving a total of £7598.00 due from the finance company. Yet the credit agreement says amount of credit for goods £8595.00!

 

Where the hell has this figure come from?

 

In addition to the above they part exchanged a vehicle and were told they were getting £1000.00 for it.

 

I really do not know where we should go next with this a) a solicitor or b) the police as there appears to be some sort of deception here as whatever the scenario they have been sold credit for £997.00 more than the vehicle cost.

 

I really could do with some advice here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats something along the lines of my agreement dont understand were they get the £299.00 for extras :S Only thing extra is were gettin ripped off!! Can they even put tht on the agreement for the part exchange £1.00?? I got told as i was giving them my old car i would get the £1000 of my balance but its never came off neither has the £150.00 deposit i paid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think the £299 is for guardex paint protection which they probably never did.

 

The £8595 will most likely be made up of the price of the car, the cost of the insurances and the paint protection.

 

They way they worked the part ex was to take it off the value of the car at source and only show £1 for VAT purposes.

 

Also the amount that allows you to Terminate the agreement only relates to half the car value, or it should as this is what it does on my agreement. however in your case it does not seem to add up.

 

I can under stand they asking for £500 for the goods as in theory if the agreement is over 48 months, then you would have to pay 24 months to meet the 50%.

 

best thing to do is use photobucket, scan the agreements and all paperwork (black out the car details and all personal details, but leave figures) and post them into this thread.

 

That way we can have a nosey and make sure it all adds up and someone with more knowledge and give you some better advice.

 

Also, did you get any documents for the insurances? I bet you will find that the shortfall covers the period of the agreement, but the mech breakdown will only cover 24 months!!! this is mis-sold im my opinion as this happened to me so im trying to reclaim them.

 

best of luck!

Link to post
Share on other sites

dibboth

 

you are getting rather good at this ref welcome

 

my hat goes off to you

 

so welcome are now playing this game are they,

 

lets sort them out

 

first thing is phone these people

 

Direct Group - Where Insurance and Innovation Combine - Home Page

 

welcomes partner in crime ref the insurance racket

 

ask them to send all details they have on you

 

keep every thing on need to know from now on

 

do you have any policy docs ref these insurance products

 

direct group will send copies if not

 

can you post up the agreement as requested minus personal info but leave in the figures

 

that letter from welcome ref the vt

 

can you post that up also

 

you have no wories on this, i can assure you of that

Link to post
Share on other sites

dibboth

 

you are getting rather good at this ref welcome

 

my hat goes off to you

 

 

Only picking up from the experiences of others and from good people like yourself.

 

If I hadnt had found this site I would not even know about the problems with Welcome etc...

 

Certainly opened my eyes a bit!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have now pasted the agreement and car order form details - as you will see the amount of credit (before insurances) is £997.00 more than price of vehicle! the order form clearly states that amount due from finance company is £7598.00 not £8595.00 as shown on agreement.

 

CleanAgreement.jpg

 

CleanAgreement2.jpg

 

IMG]http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a115/Billyborder/Welcome/CleanOrderForm2.jpg[/img]

 

CleanOrderForm-1.jpg

 

CleanOrderForm2.jpg

 

CleanWelcomeletter212.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

How Do You Want To Play This

 

Welcome Have Shafted You Big Time And You Have The Proof To Back Up Your Claim

 

No Doubt Internal Commission Comes Into This#

 

Welcome Elite Brokers

 

Pleas Confirm This Was A Welcome Show Room And Not An Indapendant Garage

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 years later...

Well we had a few letters from Welcome about this and then several fron various DCA's who we told to go away as the agreement was flawed etc etc. Now we have a letter from PRA Group saying they have bought the debt and demanding payment etc etc. Letter sent suggesting that they send it back to Welcome (Cattles) as account is in dispute. They follow up with a letter 'requiring' us to forward the evidence - that's not going to happen as Welcome have had copies of the flawed car invoice etc and we have invited them to take court action which obviously they have not yet done. Letter sent to PRA again stating our position so will keep thread updated as no doubt this will go on for a bit, to be honest it would be nice to go to court to show what has happened. No doubt others will be having their Welcome accounts sold to PRA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...