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

Barclaycard PPI-Denied as ppi was taken out prior to 2001!!!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4025 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 139
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The FOS should compensate you separately for their failings but it won't amount to much.

 

Contact BC direct to ask them to give you an UPDATED offer to remedy the situation.

 

I suggest you also recalculate yourself, using a site spreadsheet so you know if the offer, when it arrives, is in the right ball-park.

 

:wink:

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 6 years normally applied to claims doesn't apply to PPI cases.

 

If you have the data relating to older PPI charges, use this on your spreadsheet.

 

:wink:

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, we don't, but FOS said they are now estimating it based on recorded usage?

 

The amount that a PPI premium was charged each month was based on a fraction like 78p to insure £100. So if your credit card has an outstanding amount of £1000, they would charge you £7.80. For £5000, that would be £36 extra tacked onto your monthly statement. So long as you were unable to clear off the entire amount, that PPI premium would accumulate compound interest on its own at a rate of 1.25% to 2% per month (16% to 25% per year). In some cases, you could end up with the monthly interest plus PPI matching the maximum amount you were able to pay each month.

 

The only way the total cost of PPI can be calculated is through a spreadsheet with the dates going downwards and various pieces of information like outstanding balance, payments, credit card interest, PPI premium plus final balance listed for each month. Then you can calculate the total PPI payments plus accumulated interest and date you would have paid off your credit card if it had not been for this premium.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do not accept what they say about the records. Press on with your claim and be sure to pass all the correspondence to the FOS. I have had a few fights with the banks and they will try anything to prevent paying out. Stick with it. You claim mis selling let them prove you are wrong! PPI was mis sold on a massive scale and it is still is being mis sold even after the high court judgement. Please do not be put off by a few comments from greedy banks.

 

aa

  • Haha 1

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

------------------------------------------------

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

[ATTACH]41265[/ATTACH][ATTACH]41265[/ATTACH]Just sat down to do some proper reading through these computer printouts BC sent us in response to DSAR, and have found some interesting info:

 

1. The date and amount of each credit limit increase, some very close together, which to a logical person would suggest the NEED for an increase.

2. A transfer amount in 2002, when we went from Gold to Platinum card.

3. The lifetime highest balance!!!! Which is much higher than any of the statements we have. That balance, coupled with the transfer amount, and the credit limit increases, I believe put a lot more wieght in an educated guess of the balance-best of all, all info they provided us!

 

What does anyone think about that?

Edited by candyapple1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Do not accept what they say about the records. Press on with your claim and be sure to pass all the correspondence to the FOS. I have had a few fights with the banks and they will try anything to prevent paying out. Stick with it. You claim mis selling let them prove you are wrong! PPI was mis sold on a massive scale and it is still is being mis sold even after the high court judgement. Please do not be put off by a few comments from greedy banks.

 

aa

 

 

blimey a ghost...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

[ATTACH]41265[/ATTACH][ATTACH]41265[/ATTACH]Just sat down to do some proper reading through these computer printouts BC sent us in response to DSAR, and have found some interesting info:

 

1. The date and amount of each credit limit increase, some very close together, which to a logical person would suggest the NEED for an increase.

2. A transfer amount in 2002, when we went from Gold to Platinum card.

3. The lifetime highest balance!!!! Which is much higher than any of the statements we have. That balance, coupled with the transfer amount, and the credit limit increases, I believe put a lot more wieght in an educated guess of the balance-best of all, all info they provided us!

 

What does anyone think about that?

 

use the go advance button

manage attachments

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

.

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

no

 

hit the go advanced button bottom right below the quick reply msg box

 

if you cant open it we cant

 

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

so can we

 

dunno wht that is though

 

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

Just sat down to do some proper reading through these computer printouts BC sent us in response to DSAR, and have found some interesting info:

 

1. The date and amount of each credit limit increase, some very close together, which to a logical person would suggest the NEED for an increase.

2. A transfer amount in 2002, when we went from Gold to Platinum card.

3. The lifetime highest balance!!!! Which is much higher than any of the statements we have. That balance, coupled with the transfer amount, and the credit limit increases, I believe put a lot more wieght in an educated guess of the balance-best of all, all info they provided us!

 

So except for the ppi averages, al the other info came from BC. I was just thinking pretty solid case to argue average ppi amounts in the absence of statements?

Link to post
Share on other sites

you can do that anyway as the fos say where you have no statement use an avg of what you do know.

 

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

blimey a ghost...dx

 

Yes I'm back but slowly slowly I will need some help with the new site layout but ready to help when and where I can.

 

aa

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

------------------------------------------------

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

FOS have been back in touch,

fixed the error,

a nd I have to say,

the three people I am now dealing with are fantastic.

 

Great apology,

a promise by the manager to personally monitor both our cases,

and a compensation payment-small, but still nice!

 

Now e have to wait and see what BC come up with on their offer....

....1994-current date PPI,

high balances from 1998 to 2003...

 

.I bet they send a very low offer, but steadily accruing info to back up higher claim.

 

We shall see...

 

.also, have sent more info I found in the paperwork they sent us to ICO to suggest they do have more info/statements than they have provided us!

Link to post
Share on other sites

how surprising ...not the first time BC have been found NOT to have included EVERYTHING

they hold in an SAR reply!!

 

GOOD WORK!!

 

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

Thanks...I was a bit excited when I saw a memo text referring to "Copies to correspondence PPI Glasgow Jan 01 to Apr 04", even though all we have received is from after that, and have been categorically told, in writing, they have nothing further....

Link to post
Share on other sites

FOS have just emailed to say BC have told them our complaint has been calculated, and that a payment will be made no later than this Friday........um, what paymen??? We have not even seen an offer? I know we signed the agreement from FOS, but I thought we still got the offer letter with an amount from BC, and then we would decide whether to accept or not???? Is this the way it is normally done when dealt with by FOS???? What if we do not agree with the amount?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi candyapple,

 

The FOS will have a standard format for claims. Better to phone the FOS with your complaint reference number and ask them what Barclays have offered.I have been through the FOS for several claims and although you may disagree with their figures best to check what is offered before accepting.

 

In my case the FOS advised me of the amounts that were being offered but it was a case of here is the form sign if you accept the offer.

 

I recovered in excess of £23K on all my claims through the FOS

 

aa

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

------------------------------------------------

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The woman who told me from FOS did not know what the amount was! We have not seen or signed anything, I think they are going to fob us off with some paltry amount, and deposit it without sending us an offer, so we can't refuse! Not happy, finding it all v stressful and feel helpless!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...