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
      • 162 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

HSBC Overdraft


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5103 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 all,

 

I have another thread running regarding some loans that HSBC haven't produced the CCAs for yet. I stopped making repayments in September last year, having moved all of my current account stuff to Lloyds so they couldn't use the right of offset. This left an overdraft balance of around £450.

 

Predicatably, after a couple of months of no activity on the account they wrote to me demanding repayment. I was a bit annoyed because they sent the letter during the snowy period, so I didn't receive it until after some woman phoned me demanding immediate repayment!

 

After stalling for a bit, making complaints, etc. I sent them a CCA request in June and got this response back today:

 

Thank you for your recent letter dated 1 July 2010 which we received on 7 July 2010 concerning your request for copies of the signed credit agreement under section 78(77) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. (The letter of 1/7/10 was a default notice I sent them due to non-compliance).

 

My understanding of your complaint is that you are disputing the balance on the account ending 8073 and feel the Bank has breached this Act by not sending the documentation requested within the required timescale.

 

Firstly, section 78 (77) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ("The Act") does not apply to current accounts. The current account is not regulated agreement because it provides no credit; section 78 (77) does not apply to the current account agreement. The overdraft agreement provides the credit and this sits seperately from the current account agreement.(Splitting hairs much? It was quite clear what I asked for!)

 

Secondly, credit agreements normally have to comply with Part V of the Act. Part V covers the form and contents of agreements, the signing of agreements and the duty to supply copies of the agreement as part of the process of making an agreement. Part V requires that the agreements be signed by both parties to the agreement and uses the concept of "unexecuted" and "executed" agreements to describe agreements before and after signature by both parties (the meaning of "executed agreement" is also explained in section 189 of the Act). (Thank you for the legal lecture. Which textbook did you cut and paste this from?)

 

However, by section 74(1)(b) of the Act current account overdrafts are given a specific exemption from the Part V formality requirements (this exemption only applies when the OFT grant a Determination under 74(3) and this was given for overdrafts on 21 December 1989, which means that overdraft agreements are not required to be signed by either party to the agreement and are not subject to being described as "unexecuted" or "executed" agreements under the Act.

 

Section 78(77) of the Act requires a creditor to provide a copy of the executed agreement, if any. For the reasons described above, there is no executed overdraft agreement and consequently no duty under section 78(77) to provide a copy of one.

 

Due to a Final Demand being issued on your account dated 7 June 2010, this required that the full balance was repaid within a given eighteen day timescale. As this was not adhered to the account was closed and sent to MCS on 7/7/2010.

 

We do not withhold action on accounts that are operating outside the agreed terms and conditions. As your account is being administered by MCS, you will need to contact them directly in relation applied to your credit report.

 

As stated in the Final Demand letter, should your account be passed to a Collections Agency, we will pass details of the default to Credit Reference Agencies (but, is MCS a Collections Agency as it is part of HSBC?)

 

--Bit about referral to FOS --

 

With respect to your comments regarding the Data Protection Act, you have my assurance that HSBC complies with all aspsects of the Act and this compliance is regularly monitored. Of course, you may wish challenge this in law, however, you should be aware that the Bank would vigorously defend its position and remains confident of a positive outcome. (This was the standard bit asking them to cease processing my data or contest this with reason within 21 days, otherwise said processing would be unlawful. They haven't complied with this, have they?)

 

Letter then concludes with usual stuff about who to write to next, etc.

 

So, where do I go next? I haven't yet taken any action under the DPA - maybe a complaint to the ICO about this and the other accounts that are clearly continuing to process my data despite my consent being withdrawn and this not being challenged by them. I suppose I might as well progress my complaint about the way the overdraft was removed etc. to the next level so I can refer to the FOS later. Any other advice though?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...