Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Gregory Pennington DMP charged me PPI **WON FROM STERLING GROUP**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1753 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

match it to your sar info??

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

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

On the ISP/PPI sheet it shows..

Provider... Direct Group ISP DMP (+£100 6.15% with 12.0% IPT ).

There is no start date but a cancellation date of 20 June 2018.

 

My SAR was dated 29 MAY 2018 and the data was sent to me 25 June 2018.

I also read a post by Hippyminky ( 15/11/2011 ) in which she refers to a policy that was underwritten by Sterling which is now Direct Group.

.at the time GP said that the sale of the policy was prior to reg's which came out into force 14/1/2005.

 

I did a search and found that Sterling were bought by COVEA who will run Stirling as a separate business.

 

The French insurer COVEA holds it's UK subsidiaries through MMA Holdings Ltd.

It's MMA who will acquire Sterling.

 

The article says that Sterling sold £155.1M in PPI & insurance in 2014.

So it looks like this Sterling is the one that underwrote the PPI for GP.

 

Given that Direct Group is on the Doc' sent in the SAR who do you think I should make my claim with......Start with Sterling and see what happens ??.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes

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

  • 4 weeks later...

I wasn't sure whether it really was Sterling who underwrote the policy so I phoned greedy pennies and they told me that it was Direct Group. I got their head office address and sent a claim letter with spreadsheet ( the GP one but with Direct Group named)...I gave the GP acct ref # but titled it " policy sold by GP ".

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I received a letter from GP today...

They refer to the letter ( claim ) that I sent to Direct Group re' mis-sold PPI.

 

I've scanned this letter and also the final response.

 

Direct Group underwrote the policy and yet they sent my claim against them to GP.

 

This is starting to look like a cover up.

img20180923_01313855.pdf

img20180923_01340297.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

removed the welcome/aviva one.

merged posts too.

 

 

there is no such thing as a 15yrs rule under the limitation act..total bowlarks.

 

its 6yrs and it runs from when you became aware you had ppi, so i'm not sure whos playing what games here.

 

the underwriters ARE responsible for the reclaim the were regulated under GISC and ABI, so me think you need to write back to both outlining the above.

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

that's ok

now as post 31

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

Thanks, I'm struggling to think of how to word the letters, it's going beyond the usual stuff that I write. Is there anything in our library that could help me put this type of letter together.

 

With regards the six year limit...

It states that you can claim back Six years from when you could reasonably have discovered that you were a victim of mis-selling..what if they say " it was clearly shown on your monthly statements, why have you waited until now to claim ?.

 

dx..Here is a rough draft of my letter to Direct Group, does it look OK to you.

img20180923_10320376.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

having consulted the FOS , I see you were regulated at the time of my agreement and your were required to operate under those regulations which you appear to have failed to do in my instance.

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

  • 2 weeks later...

I received this letter seemingly in reply to my claim against Direct Group, obviously I'm not going to phone them. I'm looking at the ISP/PPI information sheet which was sent to me in a bundle from GP in reply to my SAR which I'll upload as well.

img20181007_20563588.pdf

img20181007_20455364.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

What he querying?

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

That's exactly what I thought, After GP knocked me back I claimed against Direct Group and GP came to their defence, then I wrote a Letter to DG and CC'd Pennington and now RIAS have stuck their nose in..is this all smoke and mirrors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so if they are not the under writers then who were please..hiding again..

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

I think they are trying to find out what I have that will put them in the frame...The letter from RIAS which " concerns " them is in fact the letter that I wrote to them and yet they are asking me what information I received in this letter ?? it just doesn't make sense. They're looking for a phone number so that they can have an off the record chat and try to feel me out. Do you think that they have overlooked the fact that I have the ISP/PPI doc'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

actually I wonder if the cat has been let out the bag here

and these were the underwriters and they wanna know who dubbed them in??

 

so write back stating you will only converse by letter as if further investigation needs to be carried out by the FOS , you will have no papertrail to reference.

 

so what information are you after please

 

might be an idea to start digging into Co histories here too

as id expect you'll to find links between all three but that history is years old now so probably immaterial now

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

I just checked the GISC and Direct Group were incorporated 22/1/90 and are listed as active they are a plc. Also I was looking at the letter from RIAS and happened to notice at the foot of the letter the following...…………….Direct Group Limited. Registered in England and Wales ; No 2461657. Registered Office ( the one I wrote to ), Authorized and Regulated by the FCA. All calls recorded etc. It's so faint that it doesn't show on the scan that I uploaded.

Link to post
Share on other sites

rias are car insurance..someone giving you the run around?

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

Yeah, smoke and mirrors. I'm thinking that I write to Direct Group informing them that my correspondence was addressed to them and not a car ins' company and that they should issue a response to my claim by 29th ( deadline date ) or I will put the matter in the hands of the FOS...what do you think ?.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Today I phoned the FOS regarding the situation with GP and Direct Group,

they said that as the policy was sold by GP and because it was sold In 2001 GP cannot be held at fault as they were unregulated at the time.

 

They also doubted whether Direct Group could be held responsible because GP had admitted it was them who sold the PPI.

 

I then phoned the FCA who said that I could go down the Plevin route as this was not about the actual selling of PPI but rather about the premium charged.

 

So I'm going to write to GP and ask them to investigate my complaint under the Plevin ruling.

 

Is there a template letter regarding a Plevin Complaint.

Link to post
Share on other sites

true but plevin typically is a lot less than a PPI claim, you only get back the hidden commission GP paid.

 

strange comment by the FOS, every 'creditor' admits they sold PPI, its on their agreement, but if or not you can go after say the underwriters has no nowt to do with any admittance by the 'creditor'.

 

doesn't change the fact the underwriters sold the package to the creditor, and would have been regulated under GISC or ABI undoubtedly.

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

What knocked me back was the FOS saying that they doubted that they would be able to give the conclusion that I wanted. Do you think that I should stick to my guns and wait until the deadline passes then lodge my complaint with the FOS re' Direct Group. In the event that I get no joy with the FOS would I still be able to go down the Plevin route.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you cant have both, so doesn't matter eitherway.

 

if the reclaiming of the sums you paid for PPI eventually doesn't get you anything...

THEN you go after a claim under the plevin rule after the secret hidden commission the original creditor paid to whomever sold them the PPI package.

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

OK thanks I'm clear on that now. Just one thing, would it help if I knew for sure just who did the underwriting for GP. The reason I'm asking is that the ICO said that if I asked GP who underwrote the policy they have to tell me. does that make sense. Also the deadline for Direct Group to give a response is 29th of this month, should I wait or lodge a complaint before that date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...