Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I forgot to say, there is one last possibility and that is that they will receive your letter of rejection and simply fold, accept the rejection and refund you. Don't wait too long for this. Seven days maximum – but in that seven days you could send your letter of claim anyway and when that you don't hear from them or when they start mucking around at least you are seven days closer to beginning the legal action – and they will know it (which is the important thing).
    • Okay that is excellent that you have an email between the garage and the warranty company confirming that there is a serious problem with the gearbox. That is very powerful evidence. I think the situation is this: you have sent them a letter of rejection but the reputation of big motoring world is that they won't take a lot of notice and they will try to prevaricate and maybe even blame you. Clearly you don't want the car any more and anyway it sounds as if the cost of repairs is going to be enormous. You don't know if the warranty company is going to step up to the mark but the whole thing is going to take a long time and I understand that you have lost confidence in big motoring world because of this event and also their reputation which you are now discovering on Facebook and on this forum and no doubt elsewhere. On the basis that you don't want the car any more and you want your money back, you need to hurry things along. I think the first thing is that you need to decide if you are prepared to bring a claim in the County Court. Even without the warranty money, the claim is worth more than £10,000. For actions less than £10,000, you bring a "small claim" and this means that even if you lose the case you won't be liable for the other side's costs. If you win the case then not only will you get your money plus interest but also you will recover all of the costs of the action. For actions more than £10,000, you go to something called the "fast track" and in the event that you lose the case, then you could be liable to reimburse the winner some of the costs. This means that in addition to not recovering your own money, you would lose your own court fees and also you would have to to bear the costs of the other side probably something less than £5000 – but as a rough guess. If you bring your court claim then your chances of success are almost 100%. Frankly if you brought a court claim then I can imagine that big motoring world will put their hands up and pay you out rather than face go to court and losing and getting a judgement against them. However, it you need to consider that this is a risk factor – although my view it is a negligible risk factor. If you did bring a court case, it wouldn't be instant. If they put their hands up then it would probably happen very quickly. If they didn't put their hands up then you could take anything up to a year for the matter to be resolved and during that time you would be without your car and without your money and in the middle of litigation. I'm explaining this to you say that you understand how it works. Bring a court case would be really the last resort when everything else has failed. However, I'm quite certain that you would win and it would be stupid of big motoring world to try to resist. In order to bring a court case you would have to send a letter of claim giving them 14 days to accept rejection and organise the refund otherwise you would begin the claim. Don't imagine that you could bluff this. If you did send a letter of claim then you would have to go through with it otherwise you lose all credibility and you might as well pack up and go home. So with this in mind, here are possible courses of action you could take. You can simply wait and see what their reaction to your letter of rejection will be. However they may not reply or else they may find some other reason to delay and of course during that time you will be without your car and without your money blah blah blah, not knowing if big motoring world were going eventually to start acting sensibly and respectfully towards you. The second thing you can do – and I think this has been suggested on Facebook – is that you can go along there and simply make yourself present and talk to other customers and generally speaking make a nuisance of yourself and embarrass them to the point where you would be explaining to other potential customers to be careful, to look on Facebook, and to do some careful research before they put their business to big motoring world. This has a reasonable chance of success although you would have to be careful. You should go accompanied by a friend and there should be no anger, no arguments, nothing that could be considered as being overly aggressive so that big motoring world would have no justification in kicking you out or even worse, calling the police. If you did this, then I would suggest that you record everything on the telephone carried in a pocket. A fully charged battery will probably keep a voice recorder and a telephone going for more than 20 hours or 30 hours. The other person can video any incidents so that everything is clear and you can inform big motoring world then it will be going up on the Internet. If you did this, my favourite option would be to issue the letter of claim giving them 14 days, and then going along to big motoring world with a copy of your letter of rejection and a copy of the exchange between the mechanic and the warranty company and a copy of your letter of claim – all settled together – and probably about 20 or 30 copies in all and I would start handing them out to any customers who came in. Big motoring world will soon get the picture and they will either move your the premises in which case you stand outside and carry on doing it or they will finally give in. Of course there is a chance that they won't give in and they will simply call your bluff – but in that case I think you have no choice other than to follow through with your 14 day threat in the letter of claim and to begin the legal action. At the same time you should be putting up reviews on Google and also trust pilot explaining exactly what has happened and also explaining that the mechanic has confirmed to the warranty company that there is the serious problem, that you have asserted the right to reject and that this is been ignored by big motoring world and that you have now sent a letter of claim and that you will be starting a legal action in 14 days. Once again, don't bluff about the legal action. If you threaten it – then you must mean it – and on day 15 you click of the claim. You don't need a solicitor for any of this. It's all fairly straightforward and of course we will help you all the way that it the decision is yours to make and I think you need to make it fairly quickly. I think the cost of starting an action for about £13,000 is 5% and then also if it goes to trial which I would say is almost impossible – there would be an additional fee. You would claim interest at 8%. A judge might award a lower figure but frankly if you can show that big motoring world is attempting to ride roughshod over your very clear statutory consumer rights, I can imagine that the judge will want to show displeasure by awarding the full 8% which is a pretty good rate – even though it's not compensation for the hassle and the distress you are going through. If you decide to get solicitor, then if you win the case, because it is over £10,000 you will recover some of your costs but you won't recover all of them. If the solicitor begins by having exchanges of letters then I doubt whether you will be up to recover the cost of those and you could easily find that you're chalking up 500 quid or even a thousand simply on initial exchanges of correspondence. Also you need to bear in mind that if after having exchanges with a solicitor, big motoring world cave in – then you definitely won't get those costs back because you won't have gone to court and therefore a judge will not have made the order for payment of those costs. I suggest very strongly that you avoid paying any money for a solicitor and that you do it yourself. It's not a big deal – although you will have to you react quickly to the help we offer on this forum. Also, an additional benefit is that you will learn a lot and you will gain confidence and eventually you will feel good about suing anybody else who gets in your way. Nothing not to like! If you do decide to instruct a solicitor then you must take control of the solicitor. Most of them prefer to sit in an office writing letters on the clock. If you do decide to instruct a solicitor then you must instruct the solicitor very firmly that they should send one letter of complaint giving seven days. A second letter – a letter of claim giving 14 days and that they must then begin the action. If you don't do this. If you don't take control then it will simply cost you money, you will be without your car even longer and of course without your money. The whole thing is a nightmare. I think I've laid out the options but please do ask questions. I hope you can see that this is the kind of advice that you won't be getting on Facebook. Nothing against Facebook. It's good as a meeting place and to make people realise that they aren't on their own – but after that the advice given is weak and confusing.  
    • What makes you say that?  I have no idea how I would go about that or why they would even entertain discussions now that they've won the Court case
    • Our main Equity Partner, Cabot Square Capital invests 
    • Yes it’s the garage and warranty company. And then my husband forwarded me the email. 
  • 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

Cap1 & CCA return


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4982 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

Can anyone tell me if this interest and repayment are worked out correctly on this agreement pls: It's an Interest Only loan.

This is exactly as it appears on the agreement and each line in its own box:

 

1) Loan Facility - £64,460

2) Optional PPI - £0

3) Total Loan Amount - £64,460

4) Your Brokers Fee - £3500

5) Loan Administration Fee - £795

6) Monthly rate of Interest (variable) 1.12%

7) Which is the same as a mortgage rate of - 13.44%

8.) Number of Mthly Interest Payments - 180

9) Monthly interest payment (variable) which does not repay any capital - £721.95

10) Title Indemnity fee - £165

 

Loan started Feb 06

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 17.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Because it is interest only, you pay the monthly interest as it accrues- it is not compounded.

 

1.12% of £64460 is £721.95

 

and 12 times 1.12% is 13.44%

 

So, yes, it is correct.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Steven, that brings me to the next question then, the interest is being charged on the whole loan amount of £64,460 which includes the brokers fee, admin fee and title indemnity fee. Is that correct in an agreement like this?

 

Also, would what you see here adequately provide the 'cost of credit' as so described or what people refer to as 'the prescribed terms ' in your opinion?

 

SC

Link to post
Share on other sites

THis isn't a regulated agreement so the rules associated with the CCA 1974 do not apply.

 

As it is interest only, all the payemnts are cost of credit.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You didn't tell me that :rolleyes:

 

In that case, it doesn't have the prescribed terms to make it properly executed (eg total cost of credit). However, it does it have the terms in scehdule 6 to be enforceable but they are not split between the two loans.

 

People have thought this makes the agreement unenforceable (and Francis Bennion's paper on multiple agreements would support this) but a recent case went against this. It is going to appeal.

 

What is your court claim?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You didn't tell me that :rolleyes:

 

In that case, it doesn't have the prescribed terms to make it properly executed (eg total cost of credit). However, it does it have the terms in scehdule 6 to be enforceable but they are not split between the two loans.

 

People have thought this makes the agreement unenforceable (and Francis Bennion's paper on multiple agreements would support this) but a recent case went against this. It is going to appeal.

 

What is your court claim?

 

Repo initially for arrears (although paid them at the time of action) -then my counterclaim, agreement is Multiple - and then winds up with s.106d - I want all I paid you back :D

 

As you know, I am aware of the Heath case and the appeal although I'm hoping they don't use the Heath case as it is slightly different. Also, CCA 74 only goes up to schedule 5, is this Schedule 6 in an amendment?

Edited by Smarterchick
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, shorthand, schedule 6 is in the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 and defines what must be in an agreement for it to be enforced by a court under s127(3).

 

IMO, there is no chance they won't use Heath (probably trot out Rankine as well)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, shorthand, schedule 6 is in the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 and defines what must be in an agreement for it to be enforced by a court under s127(3).

 

IMO, there is no chance they won't use Heath (probably trot out Rankine as well)

 

 

Well they booked 2 days for the hearing, they must have something they want to say! :p Rankines a bonus!! idiots. I'd better make sure my barrister knows all about them both when I see him tomorrow...be Christmas before we get back to court in that case then, anyway, I'm sure Heath will be overturned...;) Rankine should be overturned and buried too! :p

 

Thanks Steven, now it's time for the sack...you should too, been on a long day today you have! Nite folks..

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure Heath will be overturned...:wink: Rankine should be overturned and buried too!
If there is any justice in this world, that's exactly what should happen.

 

We knew the bankers were self-serving, greedy, dull and could not be trusted.

 

We have been proved right by what has happened in the last 24 Months.

 

We knew the Politicians were self-serving, greedy and out of touch.

 

We have been proved right by what has happened in the last 24 Days.

 

We know the Judiciary is often biased, out of date, out of touch and is often steered by hidden agendas...

 

Let's see if something pops out of the bag to prove that right as well.

 

Cheers,

BRW

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Smarterchick, unless I'm missing something the agreement that you attached for us is an Unregulated agreement and, hence, not under the 1974 CCA act? I believe that all loans over £25,000 tend to be unregulated nowadays? (I haven't looked at the Heath vs Southern Pacific file yet.)

But steven4064 is much more experienced on this site than I, so probably don't take much notice of what I have said ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

PCB, I think the point of SC's argument may be that this has been 'split' into 2 parts each under £25000 & therefore should be considered as seperate 'parts'. If you read the Heath v. S. Pacific judgment above, you will understand the references & their application (or otherwise!)

Any knowledge I possess or advice I proffer is based solely on my experiences in the University of Life. Please make your own assessment of legality, risks & costs before taking any action.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

SC, yes it has been very interesting to read about the Multiple Agreements falling within Section 18. And thank you foolishgirl for getting me to read the High Court case of Heath vs S. Pacific Mortgage! That was deemed, by the judge, not to be counted as 2 separate agreements.

Also the comments by pt2537 of our site team, dated late 2008, were very interesting re Egg agreements.

 

I have an Egg loan myself in which I am claiming mis-sold PPI. In fact, I have been successful in the claim but they are now claiming that as my loan is in arrears they are taking the whole amount of the loan off whtever refund I'm getting. Currently I'm disputing the total amount of whatever is owing, let alone whether it is so much in arrears that the "total amount is repayable" straight away. I have been currently been on a reduced payment plan for the last year or so and have missed a couple of these payments, but I don't think that amounts to 'serious' arrears really(?)

 

Steven (of the site team), well done for your unconditional wins against GE Money and Goldfish, which i have just read about!

PCB.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Under Smarter Chicks, post number 15171 of her loan agreement section 14 d it states that

 

"You understand that your monthly interest does not repay the total loan amount shown in 5 above, which you must pay off in full by the time this agreement ends.":?

 

 

Should we be worried about this??

Link to post
Share on other sites

What FG said

 

Sorry Steven, what did FG say? - that the agreement was in 2 parts? but that 14b is not something even I had absorbed until now until doc mentioned it... Speaks your minds people...tell me in laygirls terms what you mean? What does this imply and what effect could this have on the agreement?

 

Some things take a while for me to take in and fully understand unless spelt out - sorry, I can't always see your trail of thinking :roll: - penny drops - I'm away! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I am a new member. I wanted to post a new thread, but do not know how???? I am registered as a basic member.

 

Sorry to jump in on this thread, but i could not see any other of getting this info other than by asking.

 

Many thanks for your help.

Edited by alisindebt
Hi, you have given me the information that i need, so no need forr any more posts on this thread. Thanks very much!
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I am a new member. I wanted to post a new thread, but do not know how???? I am registered as a basic member.

 

Sorry to jump in on this thread, but i could not see any other of getting this info other than by asking.

 

Many thanks for your help.

 

Hi Alisindebt,

 

To make a new thread, you need to go to the forum you want it to appear in (e.g. General) and click the newthread.gif button at the top left of the thread list.

 

Hope this helps!

H

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Steven, what did FG say? - that the agreement was in 2 parts? but that 14b is not something even I had absorbed until now until doc mentioned it... Speaks your minds people...tell me in laygirls terms what you mean? What does this imply and what effect could this have on the agreement?

 

 

I thought that the 'split' agreement may be one of the primary points you would be basing your case on SC, which is why you referred to the Heath case & Steven earlier referred to the Bennion statement.

 

Can't find doc's comments - can you supply a link please?

 

I don't know the details of your case but IMO although there is controversy over the Heath (as with the Rankine) your barrister should be well prepared to argue the differences between yours & this as I'm sure they will drag Heath in.

 

Hit me over the head if I got the wrong end of the tale - I have no problem with being called a foolish girl! :)

Any knowledge I possess or advice I proffer is based solely on my experiences in the University of Life. Please make your own assessment of legality, risks & costs before taking any action.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4982 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...