Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

218bhp Vs. GE Money - PPI Clim advice required


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5234 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 2005 I had a loan from GE and firmly believe I was mis-sold £2000+ worth of PPI.

 

I made payments as agreed before then paying off the loan in full after 20 months when I sold a house.

 

I recently wrote to GE with a SAR followed by a claim for PPI mis-selling once I had all of the paperwork.

 

They wrote back saying that despite what I said in my letter the sales person "would" have explained the terms of the PPI and that is would not have affected my chances of getting the loan accepted. They also sent through the PPI application form that I had signed. They said that this meant I had understood the terms.

 

However, the application form does not say anything along the lines of "by signing this I confirm that I understand the terms" etc.

 

So I wrote back to GE, furthering my complaint and asking them to investigate further, giving further justification for my claim and pointing them towards a legal president where a signature was deemed to not represent understanding of the terms.

 

They wrote back with a standard template type letter, that made no mention of anything I said in my letter but pointed me towards the Financial & Leasing Association (FLA) to take my complaint further. They said this was their final response.

 

I wrote back pointing out that I diddnt like their use of a standard letter and that it would be nice if they could take the time to actually write something relevant. I refused to accept their final response (not sure if you're "allowed" to do that but thought it was worth a try!)

 

I also gave them the definition of the word "would" as used in their description of the salesperson's technique. Pointing out that this means they "presume" the sales person explained the PPI and that they should back this up with evidence.

 

Sadly my loan was taken out before the FOS began governing these things and the FLA dotn have a very good reputation for being helpful.

 

So assuming my last letter fails to hit the spot and they dig in their heels, what is the next possible step? If I send a letter before action, would that help?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you sure about not being able to go to FOS? I asked the question at the beginning of my Northern Rock PPI thread as my loan was from 2004 but lots of people on here advised I could. Threatened them with it and they paid out.

 

I don't know if it will help but have a look at FSA website, there is a section on PPI where they ruled it was unfair or something around Oct last year and said certain bank's had to contact customers and offer to repay them, if I remember rightly.

 

I know some have gone the Court route and won but I didn't need to so don't know the procedure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

load of bull

goto to the fos website and download the ppi complaints form

fill it in

and send it back with copies of ALL correspondance both ways.

 

i'd also inform GE you have done this.

 

you NEED to make sure your claim is correct in terms of value though.

have you used a compounded simple int PPI calc to do it?

read the notes for claimants stickie at the top of the ppi forum

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...