Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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 
    • 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…..    
    • 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  
    • 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.  
  • 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

Mr Gary Kettle


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6604 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

This is the same story as Mr M Bowden at HSBC - just waiting for confirmation of this...

 

BTW wilipwoy - did you get the Halifax lawyer's name?

Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.

 

All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are tmes when I greatly enjoy the thought of getting the banks to repay the money they have unlawfully taken. There are also times when I enjoy the thought of making the banks jump through hoops- an experience they enjoy inflicting on others.

 

Finally there are times when I enjoy the whole damned thing. This is one of those times.

 

PS If the signatory on the letter is computer generated it does rather torpedo the manual intervention argument.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gary's not real? I was so looking forward to speaking to him :( lol

25/06/08 - NatWest - Prelim letter

09/03/06 - Halifax - Settled 27/4

22/03/06 - Capital One - Settled 24/6

17/04/06 - Nationwide - Settled 8/9

 

 

Hit the DONATE BUTTON and give 5% back to support this site!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you request a transcript of the tape? It would make good reading.

Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.

 

All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find this totally unbelievable. Just when I thought there was nothing else that the Halifax could do that would surprise me they pull yet another rabbit out of another hat!!!

 

Surely it can't be right that they just make up a name for a computer generated signatory? After all they are required to be so meticulous now in the collection of our personal data all in the name of combatting fraud.

 

Surely they are required to advise us that this is a computer generated signatory and not a real person? Why do they not sign their letters "for and on behalf of Halifax PLC" instead of leading us to believe that Mr Kettle really exists?

 

This one really does beggar belief!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I don't know who is fooling who. If you Google the

Chartered Institute of Bankers combined with Garry R D Kettle, you will be taken to a list of the Fellows of the Chartered Institue of Bankers, one of whom is Garry R D Kettle, who is listed as working for Halifax plc. That's a lot of effort for someone who doesn't exist. Methinks the lawyers are having a bit of fun!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It could be that he's left and they have just carried on using his name.

 

 

That looks about right to me. When you google his name He does appear as a fellow of CIB, but when you open the corresponding pdf document that lists all the fellows, his name no longer appears.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just about to post a really silly comment then.....

 

Does this mean that the letters are not legally binding then

 

But of course they arent legally binding even if signed with the blood of the chairman

 

Silly me!

Paul

 

Halifax Status

LBA Sent 11/04/06

1/3 offered by phone 20/04/06 - Rejected

BCT Status

Statements Recieved 31/03/06

Capital One Status

Recieved Lie/Reply 24/04/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

;) Pm me in private, I have a genuine piece of the Berlin Wall to sell to you :D...

 

Ive got the ships wheel from the Titanic. I think thats why they couldnt turn the damn thing:rolleyes:

Paul

 

Halifax Status

LBA Sent 11/04/06

1/3 offered by phone 20/04/06 - Rejected

BCT Status

Statements Recieved 31/03/06

Capital One Status

Recieved Lie/Reply 24/04/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for enlightening us re Mr Gary Kettle. We suspected he did not exist last year when he started 'borrowing' money from our account and I tried to speak with him. Even the manager of my branch was not told he wasn't real. She could get nothing from his department and we were no wiser as to the sudden slashing of our overdraft.

 

I am sending a preliminary letter tomorrow to claim back £1778-00 mostly from the past eighteen months. If it wasn't so serious, it would be laughable. But I will wait for my money back before smiling.

 

Cheers all and good luck.

 

Warm wishes

Andy Moore

Link to post
Share on other sites

That looks about right to me. When you google his name He does appear as a fellow of CIB, but when you open the corresponding pdf document that lists all the fellows, his name no longer appears.

 

It doesn't on the PDF document, but I think I looked at the HTML page and saw it there. But perhaps he has left Halifax. His bonus should allow him to retire to the Bahamas!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't on the PDF document, but I think I looked at the HTML page and saw it there. But perhaps he has left Halifax. His bonus should allow him to retire to the Bahamas!

 

His bonus allowed him to BUY the Bahamas, and most of it came from my account

Link to post
Share on other sites

Google works by "crawling" a document and indexing its content. Suggesting that GK once appeard on the page when it was crawled, but since then he has been removed and the page hasn't been crawled by google since.

 

Cheers,

Leigh

Halifax A/c #1:

Court Claim Submitted: 05/06/2006 £1,836.36 - SETTLED IN FULL 22/06/2006!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 03/07/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6604 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...