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
      • 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

Funding Corporation car finance - unsigned bill of sale & PPI reclaim


Smileymiley
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4355 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

Dear All,I

'm new to this and would like a bit of advice. I'm an existing customer of the above and to be honest having a terrible time with them.

We took an agreement out in June 2007 and after a few months things got quite difficult for us and we had to send the car back.

Due to financial difficulties we then fell behind with payments and low and behold TFC then registered a CCJ against us.

 

To cut a long story short we then advised them that we were entering into an IVA agreement and passed them the details of the insolvency practioner

but rather sneekily they actually placed a charge on our property, we rather foolishly ignored the paperwork from TFC as we wanted to ensure

we still had a roof over our heads and also sort our IVA which was subsequently approved in January 2009.

 

It wasn't until recently that I was looking on this forum with regards to TFC to see if anybody had a similar experiences and I little gem I managed to pick up was regarding The Bill of Sale.

 

As I never had a copy of this from the original purchase I requested a copy and low and behold it was not executed properly.

 

It wasn't signed by myself or my partner only the salesperson from ACF when I complained to TFC they acknowledged that the Bill of Sale was invalid

but the agreement still stood as we had signed the ceredit agreemnt,

 

however, when you look at the terms on the agreement it states that "Item 4.5

"You will, immediately upon obtaining the goods from the supplier execute a Bill of Sale in the form produced by us in order to secure your obligations to us under this Agreement"

"When questioned this term with them they stated that as they had a charging order it still stood.

 

I have referred it to the fos who have had it now for 12 weeks with no action.

 

Your thoughts on this would be appreciated.

Regards

Ps Apologies for the lengthy message

Link to post
Share on other sites

you might wis to PM postggj

 

you are both going thru the same issue i think.

 

dx

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...

Update from Financial Ombudsman due to the fact TFC have a ccj and secured on property they are unable to assist. Does this mean that I now have to contact the court direct and present the new evidence of the Bill of Sale???? or is it a case let sleeping dogs lie and continue with the claim for mis sold PPI?Can anyone advise

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'd certainly reclaim the ppi whatever else you do

 

dx

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 would worry about any technicalities

if you've done the fos customer complaint form and an soc then just wait for them to reply

 

dx

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

soc is a spreadsheet of charges or schedule of charges

 

you need to let them know you have done your research and what you expect back

 

dx

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

have a read of a few threads in the PPI forum

 

dx

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

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 months later...

I recently requested a copy of the bos, and was not worth the paper it was printed on i challanged them on this n they have admitted that they have no legal intrest in my car so i am now free to sell my car, what i do have with them is an unsecured loan. Going to continue to battle out with them as there are few charges on account which dont quite look right to me. They are a nightmare of a company to deal with this has been going on for 5 yrs now and has been a very expensive learning curb.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently requested a copy of the bos, and was not worth the paper it was printed on i challanged them on this n they have admitted that they have no legal intrest in my car so i am now free to sell my car, what i do have with them is an unsecured loan. Going to continue to battle out with them as there are few charges on account which dont quite look right to me. They are a nightmare of a company to deal with this has been going on for 5 yrs now and has been a very expensive learning curb.

 

start your own thread please

 

see the info in my sig below for a video

 

dx

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

  • 3 weeks later...

With reference to the above the FOS found in my favour back in November but TFC disputed their findings what a surprise and so it has been referred to Ombudsman for final decision. Bascially FOS ripped into TFC for selling a policy to me which basically would not of met my demands and needs due to pre exiasting health conditions. They even had the gall to say that despite having pre existing health conditions I could claim ion policy however when you read the policy it clearly states that you cant.Will update when hear more

Link to post
Share on other sites

great news

 

dx

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

  • 1 month later...

The Ombudsman has found in my favour - final decision.

 

They have said they want me back in the position I would of been if I hadn't taken out the PPI

 

does that mean that the PPI premium will be refunded plus 8% interest simple

+ Interest charged for the PPI + 8% Interest Simple

and refund of premiums paid + 8% interest simple.

 

Refund of Payment Protection Insurance + 8% Interest (simple) therefore 2903.03 x 8% x (1781 / 365 ) = 2,903.03 + 1,133.22 = 4,036.25

 

Refund of interest for Insurance + 8% Interest (simple) therefore 6,426.00 x 8% x (1781 / 365) = 6,426.00 + 2,508.43 = 8,934.43

 

Refund of Premiums made + 8% Interest (simple) = 1,351.42 + 460.89 = 1,812.31

 

Total owed therefore would be 4,036.25 + 8,934.43 + 1,812.31 = 14,782.99

 

The above is what I have worked out can someone advise if this is correct please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 did do the spreadsheet but TFC added 3522.97 interest onto the loan for PPI so not sure how this is treated. I have also just looked at the contract and found an error with the workings. They have stated the total amount payable is worked out as follows:Original Cash Price + Interest + Arrangement Fee + Credit Facility Fee Interest is calculated by original cash price less advance payment x aprI thought it would be Amount of credit (cash price less advance payment) + Interest + Arrangement Fee + Credit Facility FeeWould the above be correct if so is the contract voidable?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I have just found out the FOS has issued its Final Decision in my favour. TFC now owe me in excess of £16k for PPI, interest they charged on the PPI + 8% interest simple. Now I think its about time I turned the tables on them and gave them a taste of their own medicine and start harrassing them for my money. Revenge is sweet

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...