Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Excellent news! Thread title updated. Please do consider a donation in light of the help received here. The help we give is free, but try telling that to our server hosts!
    • Hello dx100uk, After months of waiting for a response I finally got a reply and I must say it was the worst 4 months of my life the - fear of the unknown. So, they wrote back and said I was in the wrong BUT on this occasion they  would not take action but keep me on file for the next 12 months. It. was the biggest relief of my life a massive weight lifted -  I would like to thank you and the team for all your support
    • I have contacted the sofa shop who are sending someone out tomorrow to inspect the furniture. I suspect if anything a replacement will be offered although I would prefer a refund. Few photos of the wear in the material, this is how it was delivered.  
    • Yup, for goodness sake she needs to stop paying right now, DCA's are powerless, as .  Is it showing on their credit file? Best to use Check my file. All of the above advice is excellent, definitely SAR the loan company as soon as possible.
    • Hi all, I am wandering if this is appealable. It has already been through a challenge on the Islington website and the it was rejected. Basically there was a suspended bay sign on a post on Gee st which was obscured by a Pizza van. The suspension was for 3 bays outside 47 Gee st. I parked outside/between 47 & 55 Gee st. I paid via the phone system using a sign a few meters away from my car. When I got back to the car there was a PCN stuck to the windscreen which I had to dry out before I could read it due to rain getting into the plastic sticky holder.  I then appealed using the Islington website which was then rejected the next day. I have attached a pdf of images that I took and also which the parking officer took. There are two spaces in front of the van, one of which had a generator on it the other was a disabled space. I would count those as 3 bays? In the first image circled in red is the parking sign I read. In the 2nd image is the suspension notice obscured by the van. I would have had to stand in the middle of the road to read this, in fact that's where I was standing when I took the photo. I have pasted the appeal and rejection below. Many thanks for looking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This is my appeal statement: As you can see from the image attached (image 1) I actually paid £18.50 to park my car in Gee st. I parked the car at what I thought was outside 55 Gee st as seen in image 2 attached. When I read the PCN issued it stated there was a parking suspension. There was no suspension notice on the sign that I used to call the payment service outside number 55 Gee st. I looked for a suspension notice and eventually found one which was obscured by a large van and generator parked outside 47 Gee st. As seen in images 3 and 4 attached. I am guessing the parking suspension was to allow the Van to park and sell Pizza during the Clerkenwell design week. I was not obstructing the use or parking of the van, in fact the van was obstructing the suspension notice which meant I could not read or see it without prior knowledge it was there. I would have had to stand in the road to see it endangering myself as I had to to take images to illustrate the hidden notice. As there was no intention to avoid a parking charge and the fact the sign was not easily visible I would hope this challenge can be accepted. Many thanks.   This is the text from the rejection: Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a suspended bay or space. I note from your correspondence that there was no suspension notice on the sign that you used to call the payment serve outside number 55 Gee Street. I acknowledge your comments, however, your vehicle was parked in a bay which had been suspended. The regulations require the suspension warning to be clearly visible. It is a large bright yellow sign and is erected by the parking bay on the nearest parking plate to the area that is to be suspended. Parking is then not permitted in the bay for any reason or period of time, however brief. The signs relating to this suspension were sited in accordance with the regulations. Upon reviewing the Civil Enforcement Officer's (CEO's) images and notes, I am satisfied that sufficient signage was in place and that it meets statutory requirements. Whilst I note that the signage may have been obstructed by a large van and generator at the time, please note, it is the responsibility of the motorist to locate and check the time plate each time they park. This will ensure that any changes to the status of the bay are noted. I acknowledge that your vehicle possessed a RingGo session at the time, however, this does not authorize parking within a suspended bay. Suspension restrictions are established to facilitate specific activities like filming or construction, therefore, we anticipate the vehicle owner to relocate the vehicle from the suspended area until the specified date and time when the suspension concludes. Leaving a vehicle unattended for any period of time within a suspended bay, effectively renders the vehicle parked in contravention and a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) may issue a PCN. Finally, the vehicle was left parked approximately 5 metres away from the closest time plate notice. It is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they park in a suitable parking place and check all signs and road markings prior to leaving their vehicle parked in contravention. It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is parked legally at all times. With that being said, I would have to inform you, your appeal has been rejected at this stage. Please see the below images as taken by the CEO whilst issuing the PCN: You should now choose one of the following options: Pay the penalty charge. We will accept the discounted amount of £65.00 in settlement of this matter, provided it is received by 10 June 2024. After that date, the full penalty charge of £130.00 will be payable. Or Wait for a Notice to Owner (NtO) to be issued to the registered keeper of the vehicle, who is legally responsible for paying the penalty charge. Any further correspondence received prior to the NtO being issued may not be responded to. The NtO gives the recipient the right to make formal representations against the penalty charge. If we reject those representations, there will be the right of appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicator.   Gee st pdf.pdf
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

MBNA PPI Query


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4057 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

For various reasons I've only just had a chance to sit down and get back on top of this :-x I've redone my spreadsheet as per post above and I've used an average of all the known PPI payments lifted from my SAR to give me my unknown/unprovided amounts :| This figure as above comes out as £75-60. I used this interest calculator http://www.egalegal.com/compoundWindow.html to add interest to all amounts but I would now like someone to check the calculations as I have a reclaim figure of around £90,000 and I'd rather not send it off and be laughed off the planet if I've made some simple errors :roll: It seems like a really huge amount to me judging by other claims on here but then it does span around 16 years :?:

 

I can upload the sheet or just some random dates and figures should anyone feel inclined to take a quick look :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 219
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Cheers dx :D

 

I've tried PMing dj1971 but it appears their PM inbox is full and can't take any more currently!! I'll try again in a couple of days and see if it has been cleared :(

 

try again

i notice he is back around again

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Smoothound,

 

Am also having a go at MBNA and have PM'd you.

 

As I was unable to attach a copy of the spreadsheet I've used in the hope that it may help you, I have given you my private email address for you to use.

 

Under normal circumstances I would not do this but couldn't think of any other way of getting the info to you.

 

Have also made this fact known on here so that the site team are aware of it, just in case they have any problems with it.

 

Regards,

 

Bosun.

Please note: I have no formal qualifications in this area and any advice offered is given in good faith. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Smoothound,

 

Personally I would not get too bogged down about the exact amount you are reclaiming, they will be doing their ow calculations anyway should they decide to refund you.

 

The most important thing is that you have given them the impression that you have an idea of how the calculations are done.

 

In terms of the unknown amounts the FOS used the following method in one of my reclaims and it worked well.

 

Calculate the total amount of PPI you know you have paid.

Divide this by the number of months for which you have a PPI figure.

This will give you an average monthly premium.

Multiply this by the number of months for which you do not have a figure.

 

Personally I agree with Dx about mentioning self employed.

 

As you were employed when you took out the policy it would have been your responsibility to inform them of a change of circumstances like becoming self employed.

 

MBNA will just say they policy was sold on the basis of the information provided at the time and they were not informed of any change of circumstances.

 

Entirely your decision though whether to add it or not.

 

Remember to send the letter by special delivery to MBNA's registered address and keep the receipt as proof of postage. Makes no difference if MBNA do drag their feet, they have statutory 8 weeks to provide a final response and if they do not you are well within your rights to refer the case to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

 

Good luck

 

DJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your comments. Final editing almost completed then I will get it posted off to them and hope for the best :D

 

I've edited my letter below, is there anything else I should add to it or remove in your opinions?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

Ref – policy number

 

I believe I have been mis-sold a payment protection insurance policy and would like to request a full refund of my premiums, plus interest paid for the following reasons.

 

1/ When I took out the card, I was advised that my application would probably be refused if I did not tick the box to include the PPI policy. The Financial Services Authority’s advice to consumers is that, while it does not breach FSA guidelines, a borrower should not be refused a loan if they choose not to buy an insurance policy.

 

2/ Due to point 1, I was led to believe that the PPI policy was compulsory not an option and felt pressured into having it attached to the card.

 

3/ I was not advised that I could get similar insurance elsewhere outside of MBNA.

 

4/ The Terms & Conditions were not fully explained to me and they were never sent out to me when I was accepted and received the card.

 

 

I do not believe being forced to buy this policy as part of the card application was a fair and reasonable obligation as I did not need this insurance nor would I have been able to use it once I became self employed.

 

 

I am requesting a full refund of all my insurance payments, plus interest, which total £******. I enclose a spreadsheet printout of my calculations including estimated payments to cover the early payments. The estimated payments are included because so far you have failed to provide these details even after sending me a letter dated 24/9/10 assuring me of “a full written response within 40 days from the date we received your letter”

 

If I do not receive a favorable response from you I will pursue this claim through the Financial Ombudsman.

 

Yours faithfully,

Edited by Smoothound
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...

So the last letter gave a date around the end of April and today I've received another with the same spiel as above saying they will contact me again "within the next 21 days..."

 

Is this just stalling tactics or do they always do this? Surely it's not that hard to say yes or no to my request??

 

Is it time to write a letter or phone the FOS or just go the court route?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Smoothound,

 

This happened to both myself and my wife so does not seem out of the ordinary for them.

 

For us they sent a third letter asking for proof of our employment status, which we sent, and within a couple of weeks got a refund.

 

They only refunded the principle though so we complained to the FOS. This complaint had been with FOS for over a year so we're now taking the court route.

 

In your case I don't think the FOS will accept a complaint untill you get a letter from MBNA saying it's their final decision though.

 

Regards,

 

Bosun.

Please note: I have no formal qualifications in this area and any advice offered is given in good faith. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a bit confused here! Having read around a bit more it seems to me they are not duty bound to pay out the compounded interest anyway and only pay the 8% if it goes via the court? If this is the case it seems futile and a waste of time do the spreadsheets in the first place! Or am I just reading things wrong?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a bit confused here! Having read around a bit more it seems to me they are not duty bound to pay out the compounded interest anyway and only pay the 8% if it goes via the court? If this is the case it seems futile and a waste of time do the spreadsheets in the first place! Or am I just reading things wrong?

 

I've had a couple of successful claims for PPI and got the compounded interest. If your complaint is upheld, you should be put back in the situation if you had not had the PPI charges taken, so this would include the interest that had built up over time. So the way I see it, is if you get your PPI charges + compounded interest, all they are doing is paying back what they have taken. The additional 8% a court would award is compensation I feel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ditto here Citybloke,

 

The one with Egg, which included principle, compound, simple at 8% plus £250 for the inconvenience they had caused got £7,500 knocked off my balance.

 

We're going a bit harder with MBNA claiming 8% on top due to the fact that they had use of our money due to their 'mistake'. They were charging us 19 & 16% respectively so 8% seems a fair amount.

 

And, if the court wishes to add a bit extra, who are we to go against the Courts of this fair land?

 

Regards,

 

Bosun.

Please note: I have no formal qualifications in this area and any advice offered is given in good faith. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ditto here Citybloke,

 

The one with Egg, which included principle, compound, simple at 8% plus £250 for the inconvenience they had caused got £7,500 knocked off my balance.

 

We're going a bit harder with MBNA claiming 8% on top due to the fact that they had use of our money due to their 'mistake'. They were charging us 19 & 16% respectively so 8% seems a fair amount.

 

And, if the court wishes to add a bit extra, who are we to go against the Courts of this fair land?

 

Regards,

 

Bosun.

 

Hi Bosun

 

Have you written to MBNA threatening court action and if so, what was their response?........i'm drafting a letter today to send to MBNA stating i'm going with the courts option, so just wondered if they had commented on your action?

 

Cheers

 

Citybloke

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

MBNA have not bothered to respond to my Letter before Action, which was sent recorded fortunately. This was sent over 28 days ago so they have had enough time to respond but why they haven't I don't know.

 

Next stop is the N1 form into our local courts for my cliam, and claimonline for my other halves.

 

Smoothound, sorry to highjack your thread. Will start another of my own detailing the steps I'm taking in the hope that it will be of some assistance to others.

 

Regards,

 

Bosun.

Please note: I have no formal qualifications in this area and any advice offered is given in good faith. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
So the last letter gave a date around the end of April and today I've received another with the same spiel as above saying they will contact me again "within the next 21 days..."

 

Is this just stalling tactics or do they always do this? Surely it's not that hard to say yes or no to my request??

 

Is it time to write a letter or phone the FOS or just go the court route?

 

I've just completely reread the last letter giving themselves another 21 days from 21/4/11 and at the end it says words to the effect of " we are obliged to inform you of your right to refer your complaint to the FOS, within 6 months of the date of this response..."

 

I'm now obviously outside the time limit they have set themselves and have still had no further response apart from a couple of phone calls and a letter from Experto. I'm not sure whether to contact the FOS or should I send some sort of LBA first and just go the court route? I know at the end of the day it is my choice but I'm just not sure about the next step. Is it just stalling and what is that comment about 6 months supposed to mean? Or is that just more blarney?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm by no means an expert but, it is my understanding that if you wish to take your complaint to the fos then you have upto 6 months from the date of their letter to do so. After that the fos will not deal with it. I'm sure there will be other CAG's to correct me if I am wrong.

Shelley

Santander PPI X 2 **WON** claims on behalf of son (Oct 2010/ Mar 2011)

Citicard O/H (PPI) - **WON** Compound Interest Dec 2011

Citicard O/H (Charges) Bailiffs sent in August 2012

Barclaycard - **WON** Compound Interest Oct 2011

Monument - account information being sought for OH

Citicard - self - N1 submitted August 2012

Barclaycard - self - **WON** damages for non disclosure/information now rec'd. Aug 2012

Barclaycard - relation - Failed SAR sent 29/09/11

Halifax SAR sent 18/08/2011 for relation

LTSB - SAR sent 09/08/2011 for friend

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm by no means an expert but, it is my understanding that if you wish to take your complaint to the fos then you have upto 6 months from the date of their letter to do so. After that the fos will not deal with it. I'm sure there will be other CAG's to correct me if I am wrong.

Shelley

 

I thought it was 6 months from their final comment?

 

Nowhere in the letter does it say final comment on the matter which I thought was the start of the 6 month timer? In fact it says they are still investigating... Actual wording is

 

"I apologise that due to unforeseen circumstances it is taking us longer to respond to your complaint; we would still like the opportunity to resolve your complaint, and will do so within the next 21 days."

 

By my calculations I am now on day 38 so they've over run by at least 17 days so far!

Link to post
Share on other sites

the FOS time limit is 'from the letter which states this is their final response'

 

just to clarify.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...