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
      • 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

GE Money can't find statements


Wolfy
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6383 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

I made a DPA SAR request to GE Money and today recieved a letter from them bascialy saying that

 

"unfortunately, on our retrival system, we have been experiencing problems retrieving a number of statements. On your Burtons account, we have been unable to attain various statements from September 2001 to September 2004.

 

I fully appreciatte this does not fully meet with your requirements and apologise for any inconvenience this may cause. This is certainly not our intention and I am sorry we are unable to provide the information you have requested on this occassion"

 

The earliest statement that they have provided is September 2001 and yes there are a large number of statements missing.

 

However I have had this account since 1986. In my SAR I made no mention of only going back six years, which they have failed to do anyway, and was wondering if anyone knew whether they are required to provide me with all my statements, or at least a list of transactions, going back to the start of the account? And if not how far back?

 

As an aside they have asked if I have any correspondence relating to disproportionate penalties for the missing months!!

 

They have also so far failed to provide me with a copy of the agreement under an application under the CCA 1974 and have now had over their 12 days.

 

Any opinions welcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no stipulation as to how far they should go back. If they admit to having them & you have been a customer for 10-15-20years they should provide them.

 

If they claim to have records only going back 6 years ask them what they have done with them. Your entitled to know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to update they have now admitted that they cannot find my original agreement either. Their arguement is that the origional agreement wasn't with them and that because it was so long ago anyway that is a perfectly valid defence in court. My thoughts are that if they were not the origional creditors then I want proof that they have the right to this debt. Anyway they have offered to settle the account in full for £100. I have pointed out to them that even on the limited statements they have provided there are unlawful charges of £120, ignoring the PPI which I did not request but they have applied. They have stated that if I accept their offer then I will not be able to proceed with any claim against them for the charges and PPI. Anyone got any advice?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you haven't already send them a CCA demand.

 

Also the length of time is not relevant. If they are trying to recover the debt they have to be able to produce the docs.

 

Not sure what other advice you want! They have made an offer which seems to be unsatisfactory & has strings attached.

 

If it where me I wouldn't accept but you may wish to do something different as only you know your circumstances

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to update I have now had confirmation from their Data Controller that they have never had a copy of the agreement from when they took over the account 15 years ago. They don't have a deed of assignment either. So it would appear they for 15 years they have been asking for money each month to which they have no legal right. Am in the process of discussing this with Trading Standards who are very interested as mine is not the only case with GE Money that they are looking into.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Just to update I have now had confirmation from their Data Controller that they have never had a copy of the agreement from when they took over the account 15 years ago. They don't have a deed of assignment either. So it would appear they for 15 years they have been asking for money each month to which they have no legal right. Am in the process of discussing this with Trading Standards who are very interested as mine is not the only case with GE Money that they are looking into.

 

The Information Commissioner is also interested in their non-compliance with S.A.R.s

 

Please see Glenn's thread about G.E. Statements.

 

Hope this helps

 

Sarah

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...