Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Help needed!! **NO EVICTION**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4403 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

Great news ! Thanks to this site. The mortgage company got a bit told off today in court. The Judge, (very sympathetic), told them there was absolutely no need to return to court in six months time, the agreement is being kept to, and besides he said that it was just another opportunity for the mortgage company to charge for another load of legal fees, (his words). Mysteriously... the arrears were £22K+, but are now only £13K. However, the solicitor couldn't explain this. I'm sure it'll all come out in the wash.

 

The upshot is NO Eviction, allowed to continue selling the house, CMI plus £100 as before.

 

Will keep you all updated when the charges response comes back.

 

Thank you, thank you, thank you all for your help, advice, words of wisdom.

I have had personal dealings in the areas I comment on, however, I am not a lawyer. Any advice I give is without prejudice and is merely my opinion based on the information I have gleaned from my experiences, understanding and interpretation of the law. You should always seek the advice of a qualified legal professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Excellent ! Well done :) your friend must have been really glad of your support.

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ell-enn,

 

Yes they were grateful, and I have made them aware of the help this site has given them too.

 

Many thanks once again.

I have had personal dealings in the areas I comment on, however, I am not a lawyer. Any advice I give is without prejudice and is merely my opinion based on the information I have gleaned from my experiences, understanding and interpretation of the law. You should always seek the advice of a qualified legal professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Well done, to your friend and for you being a really good friend by getting a great result by getting the help needed and hopefully the lender will realise that they cannot just get away with all this overcharging.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

I am reactivating this thread as some information has to to my attention which I want to share in case it becomes important in the future.

 

Rooftop it appears have sold our Mortgage to a company called Farringdon Mortgages No 1 PLC in 2007 and it is very likely that they have sold others as well. But Land registry still shows Rooftop as our Mortgage company.

 

I also have documentation showing that FM1 PLC intention is to repossess as many properties as they can to liquidate.

 

If anyone has been repossessed by Rooftop please can they PM me ASAP or is concerned about the way they have been conducting themselves with outrageous charges I would like to hear from you.

 

Rooftops are not taking on new business and on their FSA authorisation they are NOT allowed to hold client money.

 

Tuttsi

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be very interested to hear of any information like that. Its been a year now, they are still living in the same house, they have kept to the CMI + what the Judge asked of them.

Information like the stuff you have could be very useful to them, I'll be sure to pass it on.

 

Kind Regards

I have had personal dealings in the areas I comment on, however, I am not a lawyer. Any advice I give is without prejudice and is merely my opinion based on the information I have gleaned from my experiences, understanding and interpretation of the law. You should always seek the advice of a qualified legal professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am just waiting for the poster who posted on my thread on another site regarding matter to confirm that I am able to use his material to post here. I am sure it will be fine to do so as he/she wants as many people to know what is going on. But I can tell you out of 995 mortgages purchased by Farringdon Mortgages No 1 PLC originally mortgaged with Rooftops only 149 now currently remain the rest have been repossessed.

 

I have been totally shocked about what is happening and petriffied that we will lose our home to these people.

 

I will be sending an SAR to FM no1 PLC to request confirmation that they actually own our mortgage.

 

Land registry still shows Rooftop as the legal owner when they are not.

 

Once I get the response from FM no1 PLC I will be taking my complaint straight to the FSA as I am sure you will too when when you have all the facts apertaining to your situation.

 

Rooftops sold our mortgages back in 2007 yet they have failed to advise us. They sold to 2/3 different places but ours is definately on FM No1 PLC, I actually have evidence of this and have now seen it with my own eyes on documentation which this poster poster up late last night.

 

Thank goodness your judge has been helpful to you. Many are not so helpfull and they just sign off on these repossessions willy nilly.

 

I also have an ex policeman looking into the goings on and he says it is "Comnmon Conspiriacy to Defraud" and the way that this can be bought out into the public eye is through the FSA with pressure from a few of us.

 

I will revert back once the poster has given his permission for me to post here or I will ask this poster to post here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried to post the various link but because it comes from another site unfortunately CAG will not allow it.

 

Best if you want to view this this information PM me your email address I will send you everything I have on this.

 

In the mean time check your Land Registry - Rooftops show themselves as the Legal owner of the mortgage but in reality they sold all their mortgages mine has been sold to Farringdon Mortgages No1 PLC and I have documentation to prove this.

 

I also have the two sets audited accounts both for Farringdon and Rooftop. Rooftop is just a shell company with no overheads, no income. They it appear just service the loan because they are FSA registered. Now the FSA registration does not permit Rooftop to hold client money.

 

Farringdon accounts talks about Rooftop Mortgages in their accounts.

 

A retired policeman viewing the thread said that it is definately a police matter and should be bought to the attention of the regulators FSA etc...I am not sure if I want to go that route at the moment as what would happen to us and our home if we did.

Edited by TUTTSI
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...