Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The funds were taken by eBay, rather than Paypal.  I presume Paypal collects the funds from eBay, and so eBay then sting me for the money.   But either way, before this money was taken from my account, my eBay account balance showed as -£85.  Yes, my bank account has been debited by this amount. eBay say that they are completely removed from the chargeback process, because it is carried out by the buyer's financial institution.  So, conveniently, they cannot help, other than by refunding the chargeback fee of £14. 
    • Perfect, thanks for the detailed response. Once question, do you know how long it takes for the breathing space to get applied? Say for example I have payments due in 4 days and I apply today how does that work? Also, sorry for sounding stupid but what do you mean by default once the breathing space is in place? I mean what does "Default" mean.  After the breathing space is over and I wanted more time, what would happen? I can and will afford the payments after a few months but I just need that breather to sort some stuff out, as I have said I have never missed a payment. Sorry for the many replies but after doing a quick search, correct me if i am wrong. If it then does go into default and it goes to a collection agency am I right in saying they will send many letters and they may consider a claim? and I should only response if an official MoneyClaim is made? Also, If it does go into default does this severely affect my credit score? or will this only be in the case if a CCJ is applied.
    • there isn't one yet use the default mentioned already there. that covers all 3 debts as i assume the PAPLOC is for all 3 debts? dx  
    • a chargeback via a paypal account used in an ebay sale doesn't usually result in funds being sucked from your bank account,  just that you attain a paypal negative balance. as you saying the money was taken by paypal from your bank account without you authorising this? or is it directly the buyers name that is shown? regarding the chargeback but either way you bank account HAS been debited? dx  
    • what solicitor is the PAPLOC from? then just search xxxx snotty letter dx  
  • 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
      • 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

Audi PPI claim


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4512 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

H Againi,

 

Just started another thread for another claim ppi claim I am making. I recently started a claim against Audi as I believed that I had had a ppi with them but couldn't at first find the old documents. Over the years I had bought two cars from Audi.

 

Anyway, just over a week ago I sent the SAR to Audi who had previously refused my PPI claim saying I did not have ppi with them. It was an odd thing since I managed to find all the paperwork, account numbers etc. Anyway, I have received all their documents and find that I did have PPI with them after all on my second car and not the first. At the time I was recovering from a surgery I had had several months before. The sales guy had encourage me to buy the ppi given my recent illness. I have since found out that I would not have been able to make a claim as it was a pre-existing illness. I'm not not so sure how to reply to them now. Do I need to resubmit my ppi claim form to them again? or Is there a template that might help me demand that they now pay me back what ppi they have? Could someone also help me work out how much money I may be entitled to claim, they took monthly payments of £19.99 for the 3 years I had the car.

 

Thank you in advance!

-JS-:smile:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Can you scan up the agreement minus all personal information and I'll help you with working out your claim.

 

It is incredible how these companies deny you had PPI when it is crystal clear on the papers that you did.

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Try this method

 

scan the required letters/agreements/sheets

as a picture file

remove all pers info inc barcodes etc using paint

but leave all figures and dates.

goto one of the many free online pdf converter websites

convert the image to pdf format.

or if you have PDF as an installed printer drive use that

or use word and save as pdf

open a new msg box here

hit go advanced below the msg box

hit manage attachments below that box

hit the add files button on the top right

hit select files, navigate to your file on your pc

hit upload files

NB:you can set where it goes in the post by hitting insert inline.

then hit reply button

 

(thanks to dx100uk)

 

 

If not you can type the financial information in a post here.

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Another busy week. Received a further response from Audi a couple of days ago. They state:

 

" The policy was taken out by you through Finchley Road Audi. Insurance business is introduced to Volkswagen Financial Services via the retailer network, which consists of independent businesses, both in terms of ownership and Financial Services Authority. The Financial Services Authority (FSA) dictates that the misselling allegations should be taken up via Finchley Road Audi. However, I can confirm that Finchley Road Audi have ceased trading and therefore we will endeavour to respond to the issue raised... Volkswagen Financial Service (UK) Limited (VWFS) has never insisted that payment protection was a compulsory part of the provision of credit. However, the retailer is not within our group of companies but rather they sell our branded vehicles under a franchise granted to them by our importer Volkswagen Group...."

 

They do go on to say I could have cancelled the PPI at any time. The essence of this letter is in effect saying to me that this is not their responsibility because of a franchise. Does PPI misselling not include franchises?

 

-JS-

Link to post
Share on other sites

They also say that they will attempt to respond to the issues raised. I should think so...it was they who took your premiums, it was they who had the benefit of your money and it was they who earned profits on it.

 

The fact that franchises sold the product as agents is irrelevant.

 

You claim from whoever you paid the premiums to.

 

Regards

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Hi,

 

I have finally received a response from HR Owen since I resent my questionnaire to them on the advice of the FOS. In looking at the information they have sent although some personal info maybe correct, the car registration is for another car altogether. I am about to send all paperwork to the FOS but want to attach a strong letter stating why I reject what HR Owen have said. They have basically said that they felt the ppi was necessary based on the answers I gave them from questions asked by the salesman - a form which he filled out online - despite me informing him of having previous illnesses - they also say I should have read the terms and conditions etc. when it was sent to me . I would appreciate a sample letter or point me in the right direction to arguements that would strengthen my case.

 

Thanks!

-JS-

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...