Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • wont go near it with a barge pole as its ex gov't debt.  
    • Thanks, I've had my fill of this lot. What makes me so mad is that I had to take out student loan to get any DHSS help. And then when I tried to help myself and family they presented obstacles. Might be worth passing story to RIP off Britain?
    • there is NO exposure if you simple remove your name address/ref numbers etc from docs, over 10'000 pdf uploads are here. which then harvests IP addresses off of the people that then do so..which is why we do not allow hosting sites. read our rules and upload carefully thats exactly why we say capture as JPG, redact, then convert/merge to one mass PDF. then online sites to achieve that we list do not leave watermarks.  every once in a while we have a user like you that thinks they know better...we've been doing it since 2006 with not one security issue. thank you.
    • was at the time you ticked it  but now they've still not complied . if you read up, here , you'll see thats what everyone does,  
    • no they never allow the age related get out, erudio are masters at faking supposed 'arrears' fees which were levied before said date and thus null its write off. 1000's of threads here on them!! scammers untied that lot. i can almost guarantee they'll state it's not SB'd too re above, but just ignore them once sent. dx    
  • 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

Rulzi vs. HSBC - The story so far...


rulzi
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6493 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

Hi,

 

I just thought I would add my story so far about my claim to HSBC for £266. (not a lot compared to some claims I know, but a lot of money to me!)

 

I wrote to them via the messaging service online requesting the last 6 years statements, these were sent without too much problem and no charge (in 28 separate envelopes). I also received a standard letter re: my complaint about bank charges which I hadn't even lodged at that point!

 

I then sent on the 20th August the following:

 

Over the past six years, you have charged me for exceeding my credit limit. It has come to my attention that this is unlawful at common law, and under statute and recent consumer regulations.

In the terms of the contract which you agreed to at the time that I opened my account, it is implied that you will conduct yourselves in a manner which complies with UK law.

I require full repayment of these charges, which I calculate at £266.00.

If you do not comply fully within 14 days, I shall begin a claim against you for the full amount, plus interest and costs.

Furthermore, I shall submit to the OFT a complaint under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 upon the basis that you have failed to comply with their direction of 5 April 2006 and are therefore not 'fit and proper' to hold a consumer credit licence under the 1974 Act.

 

Today (30th August) I have checked my account and am £130 better off! I also have received a letter stating they have exceptionally agreed to refund the £130 as a goodwill payment and no further refunds will be made.

 

I will send another letter requesting full payment of my claim, but I don't think so far the experience has been too painful - and worth writing 2 letters for £130!

 

I will keep you informed with regards to the other £136...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done so far and good luck with the remainder of your claim.

Lloyds TSB - £972

S.A.R, prelim and LBA sent

Claim acknowledged

Defence received

AQ 20/06/06

***FULL SETTLEMENT RECEIVED 20/07/06***

 

Woolwich - £2288

S.A.R, prelim and LBA sent.

Offered half

Moneyclaim filed online 02/08/06

Judgement filed online 23/08/06

WARRANT FILED ONLINE 30/08/06

MONEY RECEIVED BY BALIFF 04/10/06

***FULL SETTLEMENT RECEIVED 09/10/06***

 

Smile - £175

Pelim 23/06/06

***FULL SETTLEMENT RECEIVED 07/07/06***

 

My Ex vs Woolwich - £715

S.A.R sent 30/08/06

Pelim 06/10/06

LBA 20/10/06

 

Advice & opinions provided are personal, and not endorsed by CAG or BAG, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. 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

Well, I've sent the next letter, which went along the lines of;

 

Thank you for your letter dated 29th August 2006. Unfortunately however, the letter does not adequately address the fundamental issues of my complaint as outlined in my previous correspondence.

Having recently researched this issue in great detail, I firmly believe the charges you have levied to my account to be a grossly disproportionate penalty. Subsequently therefore, they are unlawful at common law, as well as contravening at least two statute regulations and the 5th April 2006 ruling by the Office of Fair Trading.

In light of the above, I do not consider your offer of £130.00 to be an acceptable resolution to this matter. As this ‘goodwill payment’ has already been credited to my account, I will accept it only as a partial re-imbursement of the amount owed and will revise the total of my claim accordingly.

 

To this end, I will expect a further £136.00 to be credited to my account as full and final settlement of my claim within the next 14 days. Failure to do this will result in court action.

 

 

If I hear nothing then it will be the LBA, hopefully they'll just pay up as £136 is only a drop in the ocean for them.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to let you know - I received the remainder of my claim (£136) paid into my account yesterday...

 

Case closed - victory to Rulzi, and I didn't have to issue or threaten any court action!

 

Hope others get the same treatment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...