Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I hope you noticed that your posts have had to be restructured first of all my my site team colleague and then your second post by myself. Please can you present your posts properly spaced and punctuated. It's extreme difficult for people to follow when they are in solid blocks of text – especially when people using small screen such as telephones. Thank you. Please stand by for a fuller reply later
    • So far the declared value is confirmed and documemted the first Claim got agreed and they kept delaying saying the refund will show 5-7 days for BACS but that not true!   I VE been chaising this since 28th september, told on 2nd October I needed to send my bank details again as they seemed they got it wrong but not my fault yet they had it since 2nd October! Thats over 2 weeks! I   GET Money via bank bacs and from Europe and recently in 3 Days and in the UK its same day and instant!   They re messing me about and nothing else!   For contents its a Marshall  speaker small Bluetooth one value 127.99   And 2nd parcel stolen last week and an empty bag delivered yesterday for Marshall Headphones value 121.99 all sold via verifiable links and invoices and all fully covered to its value, and payment all proven as well as refunds.   The first claim was agreed but still no payment   2nd Claim had to file it yesterday and he re the empty bag!
    • Yes it will be straightforward – but you may as well give us better information so we can check that everything is in a row. What was in the parcels? When were they sent? Was the value correctly declared? I understand you had insurance.   Have you been formerly declined compensation? If so then what was the reason given?   Also, you need to spend some time reading up on the Hermes threads on this sub- forum so that you understand the way it goes. It is pretty well always the same. It's essential that you understand the steps and so it is essential that you do the reading. In addition to answering the questions above, please confirm that you have done the reading or the you will be doing it.
    • In order for an NTK to be compliant it has to comply with PoFA. If it is not compliant then the keeper cannot be held liable for the PCN.  I have included the wording from S8 though  s9 is identical in the part I have copied below. You will see that at the beginning  "The Notice  'must' " which in Law means the wording  is to be stictly observed (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; (b)inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full; (c)state that a notice to driver relating to the specified period of parking has been given and repeat the information in that notice as required by paragraph 7(2)(b), (c) and (f); (d)if the unpaid parking charges specified in that notice to driver as required by paragraph 7(2)(c) have been paid in part, specify the amount that remains unpaid, as at a time which is— (i)specified in the notice to keeper, and (ii)no later than the end of the day before the day on which the notice is either sent by post or, as the case may be, handed to or left at a current address for service for the keeper (see sub-paragraph (4)); (e)state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper— (i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; or (ii)if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver; (f)warn the keeper that if, at the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to keeper is given— (i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges (as specified under paragraph (c) or (d)) has not been paid in full, and (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; (g)inform the keeper of any discount offered for prompt payment and the arrangements for the resolution of disputes or complaints that are available; (h)identify the creditor and specify how and to whom payment or notification to the creditor may be made; (i)specify the date on which the notice is sent (if it is sent by post) or given (in any other case).   If you compare that with the NTK you weresent you will see that your one does not include  "   (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) " Your NTK also states that if you don't pay the £100 that you will be liable for debt collection charges up to £60. this contradicts section 4 of PoFA where it covers the right of the parking crooks to pursue motorists [5] (5)The maximum sum which may be recovered from the keeper by virtue of the right conferred by this paragraph is the amount specified in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)(c) or (d) or, as the case may be, 9(2)(d) (less any payments towards the unpaid parking charges which are received after the time so specified).   So their NTK is non compliant in two places.    In any event Ambreen is wrong to declare that if they cannot pursue the keeper than they can assume that the keeper was the driver. The court will not entertain that idea -VCS need to provide strict proof that the keeper is the driver. So despite Ambreen claiming that they can proceed against the keeper she is wrong. [17,18 and !9 of her WS]. They quote Parking Eye v Beavis   [22] which is irrelevant since that was a free car park and yours is a residential parking space covered by a lease which VCS cannot overturn.    
    • I can't remember if we mentioned that Door Matt was offered a job as UN envoy to help Africa to recover from Covid.   According to several people on Twitter, the UN seem to have read the joint select committee report on the UK's handling of the pandemic and withdrawn the job offer.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

"Fun" with GE Money

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4008 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi I am new here, I have got a final response letter from GE Money Servicing Ltd Resolutions It states that our PPI was sold from a broker called Spectrum Loans & Mortgages Ltd of 105 Hamlet Court Road Westcliffe on Sea and yes they are gone

When we took our loan we understood we were dealing with GE Money direct and have never heard of this broker all paper work is i group / GE Money I sent a letter recorded to GE regarding this then rang as got no reply Mr Nasty Resolutions Manager Kevin ........... told me they had sent a letter but YES We never received it prob as I asked for proof about this broker and secret comm. So I am in the same boat but am now really thinking of going to the papers then take them to court as all my paper work is all from GE / i group

I don't know if this is any help to you.


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do your dates fall before the FGSA parameters mentioned earlier; if so the michellej lead above looks promising - my lad hasn't yet decided whether to file a case based on it but it do look interesting

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
We lost out with our ppi claim involving GE money thru an agent.

Following discovery that the agent was no more, we were advised by FSA to apply through Fin Services Compensation Service.

However the reply I had back contains "FSCS can only consider claims relating to advice on policies or arranging of policies on or after 14 January 2005, and only against firms that were authorised to arrange insurance by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) at the date the policy was arranged. Insurance brokers first became regulated by the FSA on 14 January 2005.

Unfortunately, as Insurance brokers only became regulated on 14 January 2005, we are unable to look at claims prior to that date as this is not retrospective.

A full list of COMP rules can be found on the FSA website ".

The agents concerned went bump some years before 2005.

So much for the FSA


Complaints about members of GISC and MCCB

3.2 This year, the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Transitional Provisions)

(Complaints Relating to General Insurance and Mortgages) Order was made. It

sets out a new way for certain complaints that would previously have fallen under

the Mortgage Code Arbitration Scheme or the Dispute Resolution Facility set up

by GISC to be dealt with from 31 October 2004 (in the case of mortgage activities)

and 14 January 2005 (in the case of insurance mediation activities). It provides for

these complaints to be dealt with by the Financial Ombudsman Service. We have

also made consequential changes to our Handbook to accommodate these new

arrangements in the Complaints Sourcebook (Mortgages and General Insurance

Transitional Complaints) Instrument 2004, which is available at FSA handbook 2004.


The way I understand this,is that if the broker was covered by one of the above and then the FSA from the takeover of redress cover dates, then under FSA rules the FSCS can't refuse investigation.


Link to post
Share on other sites

:-xOh i know all about GE and companies they use to sell thier loans that go bust, we had a loan with GE home finance,through a company Click for freedom, who have also gone bust,this is very strange, my claim is after 2005 , but not sure if i could still take them to court i was sending court papers off, then just seeen this thread,so if Click for freedom has gone bust can i not take GE to court ???A solicitor was going to pursue them on my behalf for some of my ppi so they must think i can take them to court , but i want to do it myself but im confused now,iv been pursuing them for 2 years now,and they said i had to make a new complaint ???as so much time has elapsed ? so iv just recieved a letter from resolutions dept saying they are looking into my complaint, but i threatened them with court so not sure if this is a tactic to make me not put court papers in , shall i go to court or not HELP:( surley they are liable as they collected all the payments plus i paid the 10yr loan off in 15months as i sold the house but they never refunded my ppi surley they are responsible !

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not an expert, but I am an avid reader. My understanding is that if the broker was regulated by the FSA and it has gone bust you can make a claim through the FSCS. You can check to see if a company has gone bust through the FSA.

If you are claiming PPI, some are being told to make a claim to the insurer of the PPI where the Broker was not under the FSA unbrella.

Assuming that either the Broker or the insurance company (which should be) were under the FSA, then you can make a claim online through the FOS, and you could ask the FOS for advice.

A claim firm could still make you wait years, take your money, go bust and fail to get you any refund of value. The FSCS and the FOS make it easy for you to complain, its free, and you might not need the court system.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...