Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Your page numbers should run through your WX and exhibits so im concerned its page x of 9.
    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • UK travellers have been turned away at airports because their passports are not valid for EU travel.View the full article
    • i think theres been MORE than amble evidence of that and am astonished that criminal proceedings haven't begun.
    • Yep, those 'requirements' not met to shareholders satisfaction seem to me to be: 1. Not being allowed to increase customer bills by 40% (of which well over 50% of the new total would NOT be investment) 2. 1 plus regulators not agreeing to letting them do 'things in their own time (ie carry on regardless)
  • 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
      • 160 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

PPI Please help I am so confused


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4849 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 been reading through various threads about reclaiming PPI. I sent of my SAR to lloyds and got all my paperwork back.I had three loans between 15th November 2002 until the 25th january 2005.

I have read somewhere that Lloyds would have been regulated at this time and all loans should be o.k.

 

At the time I was self employed and this was marked as my employment status on all my paperwork.All my ppi policies where one of payments and most of my loans where papyed of within 12 months but I was stiil charged £4134.86 in ppi payments.

 

Loans

 

15th Nov 2002-18th April 2003

loan £1500

ppi £159.16

 

18th April 2003-30th Jan 2004

loan £6300

ppi £1451.27

 

30th Jan2004-25th Jan 2005

loan £12000

ppi £2523.86.

 

Is there any way to claim this back???

 

Also on one of the loans I signed a disclaimer saying I had been explained the ppi terms and conditions to Speed things up and was told I would recieve a copy in the post because they had run out. I know very foolish but this was at the time banks where considered trustworthy.

 

Labasblue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ladasblue,

 

You are far from the first and certainly will not be the last to be sucked in by banks.

 

You may wel have a case for claiming back mis-sold PPI, especially if you never received prescribed terms and conditions and certainly if you were self employed.

 

In order to help with how much you may be able to claim back, I need to know:

 

1) The interest rate on each of these loans

 

2) Dates of first and final payments on each loan

 

3) Whether you received a rebate of PPI upon settling your loans early

 

Send me the details and I will do the calculations for you.

 

Good luck

 

DJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Thanks for your reply here is the dates and payments,

 

1st Loan

15th Nov 2002-18th April 2003

loan £1500

ppi £159.16

interest rate16.62%apr

First payment 16th Dec 2002

PPi advanced on the loan 15th Nov 2002

Early repayment caharge £27.34

 

2nd loan

12th April 2003-30th Jan 2004

loan £6300

ppi £1451.27

interest rate13.12%apr

First payment 11th May 2003

PPi advanced on the loan 12th Nov 2002

 

3rd loan

30th Jan2004-25th Jan 2005

loan £12000

ppi £2523.86.

interest rate 9.15%apr

First payment 16th Feb 2004

PPi advanced on the loan 30th Jan 2004

Early repayment caharge £140.02.

 

There was no early settlement charge on the second loan as it was paid of with the third loan. Does this mean I have been charged for the ppi twice on the second loan:?:.

 

Thanks again

Labasblue

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Labasblue,

 

I have attached a spreadsheet with all your calculations on it.

 

So that you understand what I have done, the claim is worked out as follows:

 

1) Total cost of PPI

 

2) Plus cost of compound interest at rate charged on loan.

 

3) Plus 8% simple interest on each monthly repayment you made, from date of repayment until date they settle your claim. As you cannot know this date at the moment, I have used 31/10/10 for the purpose of these calculations.

 

4) Plus 8% simple interest on total cost (charge for ppi + compound interest) from date you settled the loan until date they refund your money. Again we cannot know this date so I have used 31/10/10

 

Write a letter to Lloyds detailing why you believe the PPI was mis-sold and ask them for a refund of all monies paid.

 

Send the letter either recorded or special delivery and keep the receipt as proof of purchase.

 

Lloyds will have 8 weeks to investigate your claim and come back with a response.

 

I am aware they have said they will be putting PPI claims on hold until the outcome of a court case between FSA and BBA. But the guidelines from the FSA are that banks must continue to progress claims as usual.

 

So if they do not provide a response within the statutory 8 weeks they are allowed, contact the Financial Ombudsman Service and ask them to investigate the claim on your behalf.

 

Ignore any letters Lloyds may send you about claims for PPI being put on hold.

 

Good luck

 

DJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI All

Recieved a letter from Lloyds today. We are sorry to hear that you are not happy about..................... .I think you will all know the rest. I did get a phone number to call and the name of the person dealing with my complaint.

 

Suprisingly I didn't get the all claims are on hold response I was expecting at least not yet anyway:???:. Has there been a change of plan or are they just saving that one to buy themselves more time:?:

 

Will post again with any more news.

 

labasblue

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi All

It has now been 8 weeks since I registered my complaint with Lloyds and I haven't heard anything since my first standard letter. Should I call them to see what is going on or do I need to contact the FOS?

 

Labasblue

Link to post
Share on other sites

Go straight to the FOS they have had their 8 weeks.

Despite what you signed, you were not covered by the insurance as you were self-employed. I sent LTSB a SAR and when they failed to supply the t&cs I asked for them and received a copy. LTSB will not find in your favour, however the FOS usually does!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed,

 

Do not waste your time and energy writing back to Lloyds.

 

Send your complaint including copies of all correspondence to the FOS and let them do the chasing on your behalf.

 

You may well have a long wait on your hands, but will be worth it in the end.

 

DJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All

Recieved a letter today from Lloyds, Cutting all the usual out it says,

 

I am sorry I am not in a position to provide a final response to your complaint. We will consider your complaint as soon as possible and then we will write to you to let you know what happens next.

 

If you are un happy with the delay you are entitled to take your complaint directly to the FOS. The Fos contact details are enclosed in the explanitory leaflet.

 

Is 8 weeks not long enough to come to a decision?

 

Looks like it's going to be a long drawn out saga.

 

Thanks

Labasblue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...