Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Bakewell Vs Barclaycard


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6381 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

  • 2 weeks later...

Recieved a letter back from Barclaycard basically saying I cant have any statement befoe 2004 because its difficult for them to lay their hands on, can anyone advise me of my response?

 

Dear Mr Bakewell

 

Further to your request for personal data held by Barclaycard, please find enclosed a copy of the relevant information from May 2004.

Statements held prior to May 2004 are stored on microfiche. Statements are copied onto the microfiche in date order and more than one customer statement may be held on an individual film of microfiche. These statements are not stored by reference to account number of customer name and are not "readily accessible" within the meaning of the Data Protection Act. These statements are therefore not retained in a relevant filing system and therefore do not fall within the class of documents to be produced pursuant to a subject access request They can be obtained from our Customer Services Dept at a cost of £3 per statement.

 

Furthermore, we are unable to provide a computer print out of transactions on your account to date. Our computer systems do not permit us to print such historic data. Neither do our computer systems allow us to search for and identify individual charges applied to an account It is therefore not possible to provide you with a print out of such charges. I would also add that Barclaycard did not introduce default charges on its accounts until mid-2001. The statements that have been provided to you contain the information that we currently have recorded relating to charges on your account.

This information is complete in respect of the above account relationship with you at the time of extraction.

 

Should you have any further questions regarding this matter please do not hesitate to contact me. If my reply does not meet with your expectations you may ultimately be eligible to refer to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

If I have not heard from you within 8 weeks from the date of this letter, I will close my file in accordance with usual practice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

People, need some assurances on the reply I am about to make to Barclaycard, feel free to use this letter if it is of use. Can anyone that has gone through the microfile babble bulls**t let me know if I am covering my bases with this letter below?????

 

Any help is much appreciated as always............

 

 

Dear Carl,

ACCOUNT NUMBER: **** **** **** ****

I am writing to you to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 05/09/2006 outlining that you could only provide me copy statements covering transactions from May 2004 on my account, because any earlier information has been archived onto microfiche. I also acknowledge receipt of the information you forwarded.

My request was for a complete list of transactions and charges relating to my account – in short, a list of charges with dates and amounts – alternatively, a complete set of account statements for that period would be acceptable. This should be retrievable from your accounting systems, and easy for you to produce. I will accept a computer print out of these transactions.

I would also like to draw your attention to the fact that if the statements are readily accessible enough for you to offer them to me at a cost of £3 per statement then they are READILY ACCESSIBLE enough for the purposes of the Data Protection Act 1998. If the information requested in my letter of 30/08/2006 is not supplied by 09/10/2006 being the statutory 40 days from the date of the request letter, I shall lodge a complaint against you with the Information Commissioner and the FSA for breach of the provisions of the Data Protection Act. I am aware that you have been willing and able to provide other customers with a print outs of transaction information covering this period and that any delay tactic will not be tolerated.

 

Also upon further investigation the Data Protection Act does not cover microfiche stored entries is not true, it has been taken out of context. This exemption only applies to medical, educational, and public records. Clearly bank charges are none of these.

 

Yours faithfully,

M.Bakewell

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Passed to my solicitor, will take 30% of claim, and pull Barclaycards trousers down over the microfiche issue.

Can someone give me the links for reporting them to the Information Commissioner and the FSA for breach of the provisions of the Data Protection Act please.

I have seen them on here before but cant remember where.

Cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Time is the biggest factor, simply cant be bothered banging my head against the wall with Barclaycard/Barclays/HSBC. Working 50 hours a week and trying to finish my masters, not a lot of room for anything else in my life at the moment.

 

He has just been successful with my sister-in-law for £1600. I have see some of his letters drafted on behalf of my sister in law and final draft case, he is very VERY good. No offence to the guys running this site but his letters make theirs look average at best.

 

Had the claim sorted and paid out within one month of statements being returned to him.

 

You get what you pay for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Copy of letter my solicitor has sent to the Barclays:

The Manager

The bank has charged my aforementioned client numerous fees in respect of unpaid items and unauthorised borrowing since April 2001 amounting to £*** and £*** on account nos. ******** and ******** respectively. I have enclosed copies of the statements of account in which these charges appear for your information.

Having taken specific legal advice on the matter of such charges I would make the following points:

Whilst I accept that where a breach of contract has occurred, such as in this case, the bank is entitled to recover appropriate damages to compensate it for the actual loss incurred. The parties to a contract can agree, as is the case here, that if either party breaches the contract, a certain sum of money is to be paid to the other. If this sum is termed a genuine pre-estimate of the loss as a result of the breach of contract, then it stands as agreed damages and is called liquidated damages.

If the sum agreed however is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss, but a penalty, then it is not recoverable as a matter of law. The charges which the Bank has levied on my client clearly fall into this latter category in that they are excessive and therefore not a genuine pre-estimate of loss, but a penalty and therefore, not recoverable in law. If the bank considers these charges to be damages, then please would you provide an analysis which demonstrates that these charges actually do reflect the bank's costs.

There are also several cases in law which prove this argument, three of which I quote below:

Murray v Leisureplay (2004)

Dunlop Tyre Company v New Garage & Motor Co. (1915)

Bridge v Campbell Discount Co. Ltd (1962)

It is also the opinion of The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) that these charges are punitive in nature and furthermore, The 1977 Unfair Terms (contracts) Act requires that all contract terms be reasonable. I don't consider these charges to be reasonable as defined by this act.

As I am sure you are aware, the OFT has already instigated a cap on credit card penalty fees and further to this, announced on 7 September 2006 that it is now is to investigate overdraft charges and it is highly likely that there will be a similar outcome.

This statement from The OFT has far reaching legal implications for the banks who impose these charges and it is now clearer than ever that at the present levels, penalty charges have no legal validity and there can be no that this statement would further strengthen any challenge to recover these fees should one be brought before The Court.

Given the above, I should be obliged if you would arrange to refund the full amount of these fees, being £*** in total by 15 November 2006.

I sincerely hope that you will enter into dialogue with me in this matter and I have enclosed the appropriate form of authority to enable the bank to respond directly to me. Should you wish to discuss this matter with me, please feel free to telephone.

In the meantime, I should be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt.

Yours faithfully,

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...