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

Help with Lloyds TSB PPI (Asset Card)


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3673 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

  • Replies 99
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

You can ask for the complaint to be escalated within fos but you should be prepared for it to take a long time.

 

The other option is for you to sue in court.If you take that route there will be a considerable amount of work involved but the payout will be higher than fos would award.

 

Hve you done a spreadsheet or calculation as to how much you feel you are due back?

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 2 months later...
Bump.........

 

Is there anything within the Data Protection Act which states that if an account is no longer active, then documents from a SAR request must be collected from a bank branch with some form of ID?

 

MP.

 

 

Not as far as I am aware

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure you can force them...they may just carry on playing silly billies.

 

Why not arrange to pop into a branch and get it....might save you a lot of time and grief.

 

As an added extra, lodge a formal compliant with the ICO about it too.

 

i s

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

You should be getting the premiums back plus any contractual interest charged on those premiums.

 

In addition the card account should be reconstructed with the above removed and if the reconstruction shows that in any month the account would have been in credit you should get 8% simple on that credit balance for that month.

 

In order to check the offer you will need all of your statements....do you have them all?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In order to check the interest you would need to complete a spreadsheet so I can't guess at the amount of interest.

 

When the account was defaulted and terminated, they would have stopped charging interest at that point. As a result there will be no further interest to come back after that event. That is what they mean by refunding up to that point.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Were those accounts still live or were they paid off in full?

 

This one has defaulted so no interest would have been added after the account was terminated so they are not required to repay any interest beyond that date.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if you go back and check the figures for those accounts, if the awards were done on a regulatory basis, then no interest would have been paid for a period after the date the account was terminated and interest stopped being charged.

 

I would be very surprised if they did unless it was an error on their part.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You may have been lucky but I am not aware that regulatory redress has changed.

 

The idea, as I am sure you are aware, is to put a claimant back in the position they would have been in had the PPI not been applied in the first place. In addition 8% is awarded for periods where they have been deprived of their money, hence the 8% simple on a reconstructed credit balance.

 

The way that 8% simple can run up to date is where a card is paid off in full and 8% is awarded on the difference between the actual balance paid off and the reconstructed balance. That is because a claimant would have effectively overpaid and been deprived of money from the date of payment right up to the date of settlement of the claim.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

 

Why have they got zero for interest on difference from account closure date to refund date?

 

MP.

 

Probably because the account was closed and passed to a DCA and therefore the closing balance wasn't actually paid off by the claimant? (Without reading the whole thread).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You get 8% on any period where the reconstructed account was in credit.

 

If the card is closed and paid off by the claimant then 8% is awarded on the difference between the actual balance paid off and the reconstructed balance. If the card was not paid off then the claimant has not parted with any money at the time of default/account closure and so there is no 8% awarded on money that has not been actually paid.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...