Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I googled "prescribed disability" to see where it is defined for the purposes of S.92. I found HMRC's definition, which included deafness. I don't  think anyone is saying deaf people cant drive, though! digging deeper,  Is it that “prescribed disability” (for the purposes of S.88 and S.92) is defined at: The Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999 WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK These Regulations consolidate with amendments the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1996...   ….. and sleep apnoea / increased daytime sleepiness is NOT included there directly as a condition but only becomes prescribed under “liability to sudden attacks of disabling giddiness or fainting” (but falling asleep isn't fainting!), so it isn’t defined there as a “prescribed disability”  Yet, under S.92(2)(b) RTA 1988 “ any other disability likely to cause the driving of a vehicle by him in pursuance of a licence to be a source of danger to the public" So (IMHO) sleep apnea / daytime sleepiness MIGHT be a prescribed disability, but only if it causes likelihood of "driving being a source of danger to the public" : which is where meeting / not meeting the medical standard of fitness to drive comes into play?  
    • You can counter a Judges's question on why you didn't respond by pointing out that any company that charges you with stopping at a zebra crossing is likely to be of a criminal mentality and so unlikely to cancel the PCN plus you didn't want to give away any knowledge you had at that time that could allow them to counteract your claim if it went to Court. There are many ways in which you can see off their stupid claim-you will see them in other threads  where our members have been caught by Met at other airports as well as Bristol.  Time and again they take motorists to Court for "NO Stopping" apparently completely forgetting that the have lost doing that because no stopping is prohibitory and cannot form a contract. Yet they keep on issuing PCNs because so many people just pay up . Crazy . You can see what chuckleheads they are when you read their Claim form which is pursuing you as the driver or the keeper. they don't seem to understand that on airport land because of the Bye laws, the keeper is never liable.   
    • The video-sharing app told the BBC that a "very limited" number of accounts had been compromised.View the full article
    • The King is the second monarch to appear on Bank of England notes which will be fed gradually into the system.View the full article
    • The King is the second monarch to appear on Bank of England notes which will be fed gradually into the system.View the full article
  • 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

Reclaiming PPI from Norton/Endeavour


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4498 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 guys,

I'm a newbie to the forum, so hope that I am posting in the rite place. Read lots and lots of posts and decided to take the bull by the horns and try to reclaim PPI from a loan that my husband and I took out from Norton finance in APril 2004, the ppi was worth around £1880. I sent the letter ( used a template from a post on here on 13 july 2010) and recieved a reply on 17 july 2010 which was:

Dear Mr & Mrs

Re: Complaint regarding PayMent Protection Insurance

We thank you for your recent correspondence dated 13 july 2010 received in this office today 16 july 2010 in respect of the above.

We would advise that the only loan we can trace for you is a loan that you took out in April 2004. Therefore because the sale took place in April 2004 and we have received the complaint/claim more than six years after the sale, the complaint/claim is outside the time limits for referral to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

We may therefore regect the complaint/claim without considering its mertis in accordance with the DISP 1.6.2 R of the FSA rules and the Limitation act 1980.

Furthermore at the time of the sale Norton Finance UK Limited were not regulated by the Financial Services Authority as an insurance intermediary and was not a member of the General Insurance Standards Council. Therefore the Financial Ombudsman Service May not consider your complaint/claim as it would fall outside their jurisdiction. However the ombudsmand may waive the time limits in exceptional circumstances.

I appreciate this may not be the response you wanted by would advise you this is our final response.

Yours faithfully

Group compliance officer

First on reading the letter I thought, ohhh well, then when I read it again, especially when they quoted "We may therefore reject the complaint without considering its merits in accordance with DISP 1.6.2 of the FSA rules and limitation act" and then on the next line say they werent regulated by the fsa so how can they quote their rules and limitations?

I am new to this, and would value anybody feedback or advice, as I think that letter was a fob off.

Many Thanks for listening

Scottishbyrd

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Scottishbyrd,

 

Welcome to the forums.

 

The letter from Norton certainly is a fob off. While I am not sure of the FOS will consider this, the part about the limitations act is absolute rubbish, as the 5 years in Scotland starts from when you realise the error/problem.

 

I suggest you simply phone the FOS and tell them about the letter from Norton, see what they suggest. If they agree to look at this, you can send a claim straight away as you have had your full and final offer from Norton.

 

Good luck

 

DJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...

Hi Emma,

 

Still on the roundabout, Norton don't want to take anything to do with it but I am now dealing with the operations manager as even the complaints dept are arrogant git s:evil:. Is you loan with Endeavour.

 

We got the FSA involved and norton would pass on the underwriters information. So well and truely at a stalemate which is really frustrating. Would welcome anyones help or advice on this.

 

Thanks x

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

Hiya,

 

Yeah Norton are very good at that, and trying to fob you off. My case is now with the ombudsman and I have a specific adivsor dealing with it but to be honest I dont hold much hope as they have had my case since last july..and no further forward :-(

 

Hope you have more luck than I have had :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm, i know what you mean, they have had mine since last october.

I have been leaving messages with the woman dealing with my case for 2 weeks and she still hasn't replied yet! grrr

Will update as i hear anything, good luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi

FOS are saying they can't help unless i find who the underwriters are, and Endeavour have told me a couple of different underwriters all of which say it wasnt them! grrrrr!

I really dont know what to do now. Who were your underwriters?

Emmtay

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

FOS are saying they can't help unless i find who the underwriters are, and Endeavour have told me a couple of different underwriters all of which say it wasnt them! grrrrr!

I really dont know what to do now. Who were your underwriters?

Emmtay

 

Hi

 

Had you thought about dropping fos and going to court instead?

 

Regards

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Emmtay,

 

Just dropped by to see how you are getting on........sorry to hear you are still not getting anywhere with this. In case it's of any assistance, my underwriters were Premier Writers Ltd although when questioned originally about this I was told (incorrectly as it happened) that our loan was underwritten by Sterling Insurance Group. In my own case though, it was all done through the FOS and the underwriters played no part in it. Don't give up, however hard it may appear I'm sure you will eventually beat them and get your money refunded :wink:

 

Landy x

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

Hi ims and Landy

just re-found this post! I've got my own thread about this so don't know if these can be merged, but no i haven't considered the court route yet ims, maybe I should look into that, and thanks for those 2 names Landy, will be phoning them next week although i am concerned as i have just read norton have gone into administration! Unsure how that would affect things, any ideas?

Cheers

Emmtay

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...