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

First Direct Unfair Arrangement Fee?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4489 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'd appreciate any views on the following scenario.

 

I made an application to re-mortgage with First Direct last July - it was for a fixed rate and I paid a booking fee of £899. It was made clear to me at the time it was a non-refundable fee.

 

After a period of c. 24-48 hours I realised that as part of my calculations I had under-estimated th early repayment fee that my current lender, N&P, would charge on my current fixed rate. This was completely my fault and I picked up the phone to First Direct to see if they would be willing to refund my booking fee, bearing in mind we were so early into the application process.

 

They were not prepared to look at this sympathetically, a fact that has been confirmed since upon my formally taking the matter up with them. The basis of my complaint was that as a minimum, there would have been an element of the £899 booking fee set aside to fund the 'free' valuation/conveyencing fees that were implicitly includes in the sum paid at outset. Neither of these have been actioned and it felt to me that First Direct were 'trousering' this money simply because the contract allowed them to.

 

The fact the booking fee was increased to £1499 within a week for the same mortgage simply added to my frustration - surely they could have re-sold/re-allocated my 'share' of the fixed rate tranche to someone else and recouped their 'losses' on my aborted application.

 

So I'm just interested as to whether I have a potential claim under TCF-type principles. I'm conscious that over 6 months has elapsed and the Ombudsman may not now be an option (if it ever was in the first place).

 

Thanks for taking the time to read.

 

Regards

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...