Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi dx, thanks. Yes actually, that is the case with this one! I've taken tomorrow off work, I need to review the whole binder for each of these and I'll refrain from further questions until I do just that. Just on hold for court ref Claim #2
    • 1. who knows... 2. not the whole A/C vanishes from your file on the DN's 6th b'day ...already carefully explain this. 3.yes 4.already carefully explain this.
    • if i remember rightly, long ago in one of the first drafts of the old proposed gov't overhauls, there was a listing of recommended 'charges' that inc wrong reg = £20. some PPC's implemented such changes in advance. then later as it looked increasing likely the new code was never going to be implemented after it's 1st review and another set of codes was to be debated they all quietly revert back .......... dx
    • Potentially it may not even get sold on? Just the default left for 6 years then gone? but if it is sold on ill get a letter from the DCA which is the notice of assignment? Sorry what is the different between a default notice and a default cal marker? yes, i may try and work arrangements out with the OCs after the breathing space but I'll see my circumstances then thank you again for all your help and patience, I really appreciate it and apologies If i am too fast or repeating myself.
    • receiving a default NOTICE (forget simple default cal markers) does not mean it will get sold on... OC's very very rarely do court themselves.  if it does you would receive a Notice of Assignment from the debt buyer/DCA.  as for reduced payment if it remains with the OC and they issue a DN, no harm in trying but lets get all your ducks inline first. 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

Barclays bank!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4771 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,

 

Have a Barclays business account, in the last 18 months I've been knocked bandy by commision fees and referal fees in total 4,200.00. When we were banking monies every week the bank would honour all our payments to our suppliers even with funds clearing down. We've been with them since 2006 never had a problem until the last 2 years. They started to return our cheques to our suppliers saying that we didn't have cleared funds in the account at the time. They debited the same day 35.00 commision fee and added a 30.00 referal also. So when our funds did clear we never had enough to cover a suppliers payments. Why can they take funds for themselves same day when it's not cleared:!:.

We rang our business manager to ask him and he said "they had been accused by Goverment of reckless lending" how come we said when you could always see that we had funds clearing down. Even there clearing on a in house cheque (same sort different account number) has change used to be same day "instant". One client paid a deposit for work, we banked it one week and it went straight into our account. Then when we completed the work 2 weeks later and paid the balance into our account it took 3 days. We factored this into paying our suppliers but again we picked up charges. We asked how come this has gone from instant to 3 days, they said "security reasons", and that it had been clearly advertised. I could go on and on and oooooooooooooooooooooooon! about these modern day Dick Turpins. Would like to get the money back because it can't be right that they can strip you out of funds when it is not there's in the first place.:mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Thats Barclays for you mate, i'm in the same position not for as much as you 1.2k of which half is charges but they just dont give a ****e as the 9ml bonus has to be paid to the big gaffa.

 

dont really know what to do, i SAR them and request is on the way so i take it from there.

 

let you know the outcome

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very interesting at the mo, my business manager (useless) explained to me that it was at his discretion into what would be paid from our account if funds were clearing down. He choose to pay nothing but took charges straight away from the uncleared funds for me but cleared for them. Can't stand them, wrote two letters to them the first reply was a geniric reply and the second they didn't even reply. If I did this everytime to a customer I would be broke, but then they are the modern day Dick Turpin. As they say "greed is legal":|:|:|:|:|:|

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes mate Thiefs, you will see in the future when you have a few bob they will suck up to you and want to lend you money etc.etc, disgusting vermins these bankers. you need to be a special breed of inhuman specie to become one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...