Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • You're right of course, just jarring when an actual man child is knocking on my door so close to the end. Anyway, I'll keep this thread updated if ever any exciting does actually happen. Thanks again.
    • Yes I think you are right. I have to say I think most people would be honest and you would be unlucky to be with somebody who was going to rip you off
    • Would this be OK to send or is it too much detail already ?   "In response to your letter dated  xxx Intention of Prosecution reference xxxxxx I would like to advise that no collision / accident took place at the given date / time / location. There was however an altercation with the driver of a commercial vehicle who punched and kicked my car, verbally abused me when I stopped and acted in a distinctive threatening and aggressive manner. I advised I would be reporting him to his company for threatening behaviour and vandalism for punching and kicking my car whilst driving past in the road. When I tried to take a photo of his number plate, he came towards me in a further aggressive and threatening manner, so I decided to retreat into my car and lock the doors before he could reach me, as I was frightened he may assault me. I drove off and when I checked my phone later , the photo was regrettably unusable, as the camera couldn’t focus properly when I rushed back to my car. So I decided not to report him for his threatening behaviour and actions, as at the time I believed he would be untraceable anyway. So I am not sure if the accusations against me are in relation to this altercation, but no actual collision took place at this time , date and location as alleged in your letter"  
    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • They have been sending messageslike " Do you want a refund or not"  which ive said im at work just try and avoid their childish obstuctive replies as ive had enough of them but i plan on going up tomorrow , so my question is,  they have to give me a refund dont they, they can not bargain or refuse the refund if they havent checked the phone first ? Their previous messages have said they want to check the phone first before a refund is given and i think theyll try this tomorrow as they have argued all through this .... If that happens can i just walk away and then send the letter of Particulars which is due next week ? Edit :   Just for the record the phone hasnt been used since buying its been put in a protective bag and put in a draw , its in the same condition as i bought it
  • 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

#PPI : How far back can we go.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4769 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 Everybody,

 

 

Like most of us I keep seeing ad's for reclaiming PPI,

 

 

they all say we can claim up to six years back.

 

 

Most of the stuff we have originated between 2001 and 2004 (a bad time),

 

 

I posted a thread asking for advice regarding how long we have,

and Bankfodder said we had Six years from the time we suspected we had been mis-sold PPI.

 

Last week I sent off an SAR to Lloyds re' a loan in 2001.

 

 

Today on the spur of the moment I phoned the FSA and asked for clarification from them.

 

 

They told that there were two time periods relevent...firstly that we had three years from the time we suspected mis-selling of PPi to make a claim.

 

secondly that we could not claim back PPI on a loan more than six years back,and that their ruling was from 14/1/05.

 

 

He went on to say that any decision to pursue an agreement prior to that date should be based on specialized legal advice.

 

I confess that I'm even more confused now.

 

I could really do with some help please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'd like to know the basis on which the FSA are giving that advice. i think that you should ask them directly and insist on an answer.

 

The limitation period for negligence is 3 years and so maybe they are saying that the basis for your action is negligent misstatement. I think that this would be a very conservative approach and anyway, that 3 years begins from the date that the negligence actually happens. I think that it you should go for everything on the basis that you have 6 years from the time you discovered the mistake - or reasonably could have done so.

Even then their 3 year advice makes no sense to me. A recent Law Commission recommended a new limitation regime of 3 years from the time that the cause of action was known to the claimant but I am sure that this has not been implemented and anyway that had a long stop of 10 years - not 6 years.

 

I'm very curious about it all and of course you would expect the FSA to know their business - but I do think that you should ask them for exact details and references so that you can look up the details of their advice.

I'm afraid that I have an idea that they will get stuffy with you about it.

 

To my mind, you are suing on a mistake and you are seeking restitution

 

Here is what the Limitation Act has to say about that

32 Postponement of limitation period in case of fraud, concealment or mistake.

 

(1) Subject to [F26subsection (3)][F26subsections (3) and (4A)] below, where in the case of any action for which a period of limitation is prescribed by this Act, either—

 

(a)the action is based upon the fraud of the defendant; or

(b)any fact relevant to the plaintiff’s right of action has been deliberately concealed from him by the defendant; or

©the action is for relief from the consequences of a mistake;

 

the period of limitation shall not begin to run until the plaintiff has discovered the fraud, concealment or mistake (as the case may be) or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it.

Finally I have to say that if this really is the FSA attitude, then they should be ashamed of themselves.

 

THEY are meant to be the regulatory authority. THEY are the ones who have the power to bring the banks into line. THEY are the ones who could have investigated the whole PPI business years ago if they had felt so inclined.

For the FSA to be completely aware of the wrongdoings of the Banks and yet simply to advise ordinary people who turn to them for help to go and get a lawyer is gross dereliction of their legal and moral duty.

Now you really know that you have been abandoned by the regulatory authorities.

 

It's not really a surprise but it's a shock when it actually happens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your support.My SAR was sent on 21/4 so I'll wait and see what transpires.

I also found the original copy of a loan agreement with Welcome,this contains PPI and Healthcare also around the same timescale.I'll fire that off next week.

Again,many thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi everyone,I received a reply from Halifax today.They say that they are currently processing our request.They go on to say "In order to ensure we match your exact requirements,please contact me at your earliest convenience to discuss your request".

My initial reaction is to ignore this letter and wait for them to comply with the the SAR.Do you agree with this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Everybody,Like most of us I keep seeing ad's for reclaiming PPI, they all say we can claim up to six years back.Most of the stuff we have originated between 2001 and 2004 (a bad time),anyway I posted a thread asking for advice regarding how long we have,and Bankfodder said we had Six years from the time we suspected we had been mis-sold PPI.

Last week I sent off an SAR to Lloyds re' a loan in 2001.Today on the spur of the moment I phoned the FSA and asked for clarification from them.They told that there were two time periods relevent...firstly that we had three years from the time we suspected mis-selling of PPi to make a claim.

secondly that we could not claim back PPI on a loan more than six years back,and that their ruling was from 14/1/05.He went on to say that any decision to pursue an agreement prior to that date should be based on specialized legal advice.

I confess that I'm even more confused now.

I could really do with some help please.

 

HI cj

 

I sent a SAR request to the Bank of Scotland Last year and recieved all my loan details from as far back as 1999 to 2004

 

Along the way i contacted them by telephone to see how the claim was progressing and must say it was handled very well

 

Not once did they mention Time Periods

 

I recieved all my premiums back plus all the interest , i was sent three cheques totalling £5500 :whoo:

 

I hope you meet with similiar success

 

 

regards

 

 

rs

Edited by royalscot
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

The CMCs seem to fall into the trap of misunderstanding, exactly the same as the banks (although the banks might do it deliberately). Another reason not to use a CMC in addition to the fact that they will relieve you of 25% or more of your windfall.

 

You can go back as far as you like with missold PPI

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your help and advice.In talking to my wife I have discovered another interesting fact,at the time the loan was arranged she was teaching Yoga one night a week to two or three women.This only lasted for two/three months.She knew nothing about PPI (not many of us really did),anyway,the loan was paid up and a short time after that she applied for another loan.This time she was not working at all,the lady in the bank asked her some questions that were put into a computer,she was told she did not qualify for a loan.A short time later the bank manager phoned her and told her she could have a loan.When she pointed out that she had been turned down he said,"there are ways around it,it depends how we answer the questions that are put into the computer".Anyway the long and short of it is that she got the loan,however,the repayments caused us quite a few problems but it was paid in full.I complaind to the bank about the manager and also the FSO but after a few letters backwards and forwards it came to nothing.All this has made me determined to fight for the PPI on both loans.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Joe

 

Don't forget they have 40 days so wait it out (painful I know)

 

If nothing comes snd letter to them on the lines of.....

 

 

You have failed to provide any information in my Subject Access Request dated XXXXX.

 

Accordingly, I have to tell you that you have not yet complied with your obligations under the Data Protection Act 1998.

 

The time for compliance with my request has now expired. If you do not comply fully with my Subject access requestlink3.gif within 7 days, I shall apply to the county courtlink3.gif for an order to enforce compliance, together with damages at the discretion of the court.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Hope this helps

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...