Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Rather like farage .. Reform UK plans ‘don’t add up’ and costings are out ‘by tens of billions of pounds per year’, says IFS – UK general election live | General election 2024 | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM As Nigel Farage launches party’s manifesto, Institute for Fiscal Studies says ‘the package as a whole is problematic’  
    • The finance company has a 50% stake (legal Owner) in the deal so I would certainly involve them. As for the outstanding £3635 bill thats owing to Mercedes in Croydon I wouldn't be in a rush to settle that just yet and keep it in abeyance as leverage.  Where are you at with Doves in Horsham ?
    • or go really bold ... Further to my request for a copy of the agreement you refer to on ( date) I made a section 78 request pursuant to the Credit Consumer Act 1974 to which you have yet to reply or respond. Pursuant to the Credit Consumer act 1974 section 78 (6) If the creditor under an agreement fails to comply with subsection (1)— (a) he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement.
    • Pers I'd stop paying the lot and get each defaulted by a dn issuance.  Defaults can't hurt future renting no Only ccj's Can't keep saying the same answers.    Dx        
    • Ok thank you. That’s where we are getting confused, as we’re not sure where we stand legally. But we’re still unsure who we should be going to now, the dealer or the finance company? I’m assuming the evidence we have (the reports from Mercedes) showing that the fault was there when we purchased would be sufficient to prove this? To be honest we would prefer to send the car back completely as are now concerned more problems may arise.
  • 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

WF figures are wrong, can someone check these for me please


jamesbrown3123
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5200 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

Just been reading a few threads, and after trying to get a figure for VT with welcome, I looked at the figures and these seem to be wrong. It looks like the final payment includes the insurance twice.

 

The way I see this is as follows (figures from doc and also apr calculator):

 

Loan ammount £9448

Monthly payment £259.83

Interest £3023.94

 

Total Payable £12,471.94

 

Insurance £420

monthly £11.55

Interest £134.43

 

Total Payable £554.43

 

Now I paid a £500 deposit, which I have already deducted from above.

 

SO I see it as total borrowed £9,868

total interest 3,158.37

Total to pay back - £13,026.37 or 48 payments of £271.38. correct?

 

 

but according to the document below, Total ammount payable for goods is £12,972.36 which is wrong according to the apr calculator,

 

and

 

Insurance total is £554.40 which is correct on the apr calculator.

 

Ading these together totals £13,526.76, which is £281.80 per month for 48 months.

 

It looks like they have added the Insurance in (B) and again in (E), so looking at the document the figures are wrong. Can someone confirm.

 

welcomefinancefigures.jpg

 

Thanks

 

ps I hane not got a scanner so have edited a document and over typed my figures.

Edited by jamesbrown3123
Link to post
Share on other sites

James, I am at work so not time to go through this now but just letting you know that I have bookmarked this thread and as soon as I can, hopefully tonight I will check these figures for you.

 

Lee, the interest charge on the insurance is correct.

 

Are you claiming back the PPI? do you feel it was missold ?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Ozzy,

 

The way I see this is that they have given me a total payable for goods of £12,972.36 with a VT price of £6,485.68.

 

Now after 24 months I should have paid £6,512.88 + deposit of £500. The issue is that I asked for VT and have been told that there is an outstanding of £1,600 is, left the figure at work. Just dont see where they get this figure from.

 

I'll spk to you when you are finished work. Thanks again.

Edited by jamesbrown3123
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the figures again I get the following

 

A (ammount if credit for goods) £9,448 + B (ammount of credit for Insurances) £420.00 - £9,868.00

 

+

 

V (charge for credit for goods) £3,024.36 + W (charge for credit for Insurances) £134.40 - £3,158.76

 

Total £13,026.76, which is correct on the agreement, but the figure in D is wrong if you use the figures above? WTF.

Link to post
Share on other sites

mrning all

sorry but been off the grid for a while

 

now to get back in business and decode this agreement

 

we have a loan of £9448 over 48 months at 15.33 % apr

 

that gives a monthly repayment of £260.93

interest £3036.74

total payable £12,524.74

 

insurance £420

that gives a monthly payment £11.55

interest £134.43

total payable £554.43

 

so add the car interest £3036.74 with insurance interest £134.43

total £3171.17

 

so amount of credit £9448 plus insurance £420 plus total interest £3171.17

and £1 option fee with no aceptance fee

 

£13040.17

 

total payable

 

devide by 48 gives a monthly figure of £271.67

 

thats my figures and ive done it on 15% not 15.33%

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Post,

 

Does this make any difference, the figures are out by about £200, (Cant see the document from work). At half term they are saying that I will still owe £1,600, but £271.37 x 2 = £6,512.88, not the £6,700 odd that the document states, plus £1,600 that they want over and above.

 

Thanks

James

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...