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
      • 162 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

kezzer Vs First Direct


kezzer
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6642 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

Checked through all my statements since being with first direct. Came to £589 for excess overdraft charges (often when I was only overdrawn for literally a few pounds for a couple of days). Anyway thanks to you guys, I've had the nerve to claim them back!! Preliminary letter was sent off today recorded delivery....will let you know of the outcome!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great, keep us posted. Good luck!

If you found this post useful, please click on the "scales" icon in the bottom left of my post and say so!

 

The opinions of this post are those of monkey_uk and do not constitute sound legal advice. I am not a lawyer.

--

 

Halifax Unlawful Bank Charges: S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Sent 28/02/07 - CC Statement's rcv'd 18/04/07 Bank a/c statements rcv'd 19/04/07

 

 

 

First Direct Unlawful Bank Charges: Settled in Full 12/05/06 | £2235.50

Link to post
Share on other sites

Received standard letter back today, the "first direct does not agree with your contention that the charges which have been applied to your account are unlawful" one.

 

Pretty much as I expected!

 

What annoys me most is the fact that the prelim letter specifically states that it would be desirable to enter into communication with an actual human being rather than being sent out standard letters and leaflets! And what do they immediately do?!

 

Anyway, not that I'm gonna let that put me off!! Letter before action will be in the post on Monday.

Link to post
Share on other sites

NO NO NO!

 

Don't send the LBA until your 14 day deadline expires! We need to show the judge that you have acted in a reasonable manner.

If you found this post useful, please click on the "scales" icon in the bottom left of my post and say so!

 

The opinions of this post are those of monkey_uk and do not constitute sound legal advice. I am not a lawyer.

--

 

Halifax Unlawful Bank Charges: S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Sent 28/02/07 - CC Statement's rcv'd 18/04/07 Bank a/c statements rcv'd 19/04/07

 

 

 

First Direct Unlawful Bank Charges: Settled in Full 12/05/06 | £2235.50

Link to post
Share on other sites

oops...thanks for reminding me monkey! as it happens, my daughter's been ill for the past few days so I haven't been able to get out to post it anyway. Must be providence or something!

 

Just out of interest though, I received another letter yesterday from FD about being over my overdraft limit by £28, notifying me of the fact (as if I didn't already know!) and regretting that should further unauthorised overdrafts be seen, they may have no alternative but to cancel my cards, without further notification!

 

Maybe I'm just being paranoid, but I'm sure I've never been threatened with this before!

Link to post
Share on other sites

They took my switch/cheque gauruntee (sp?) card away from me some time ago when I was having severe financial difficulties, I now have a card just to use at ATMs.

 

It stopped me using gaurunteed cheques (which in turn stopped me using cheques nearly totally, which in turn stopped me getting bounced cheque charges).

 

It is a ballache not being able to use Switch, in shops etc but I can just pay in cash.

 

I have an account with Halifax that I have an electron card for, so I can use that to buy stuff online on the odd occasion that I need to.

 

Would it be so bad if they took your cards away?

 

To answer your question, yes, I think they probably will.

 

You could do one of two things;

 

1. Write to them, stating that you've already asked them for evidence that the charge is lawful and that they failed to fulfil your request. And that you therefore see the charge as unlawful, and that you have pointed this out to them, so you therefore consider them applying the charge as being a pre-meditated breach of the law. Tell them that as they have not yet applied the charge, they can cancel it. Tell them you will be checking the account on XX date (the date the charge is due to be taken from your account) and if it is debited, you will notify the relevent authorities.

 

2. Just add it to your claim.

If you found this post useful, please click on the "scales" icon in the bottom left of my post and say so!

 

The opinions of this post are those of monkey_uk and do not constitute sound legal advice. I am not a lawyer.

--

 

Halifax Unlawful Bank Charges: S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Sent 28/02/07 - CC Statement's rcv'd 18/04/07 Bank a/c statements rcv'd 19/04/07

 

 

 

First Direct Unlawful Bank Charges: Settled in Full 12/05/06 | £2235.50

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

have already done so daisy!

 

anyways, here's an update....received a second letter on friday disagreeing with my contention which, strangely enough I was expecting!

 

have read daisy's thread and been inspired so I'm sending FD a reminder before starting action on 16th May.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 03/07/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6642 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...