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

Deferment of student loan pre 1998 declined despite being below the threshold


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3625 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

Deferment of student loan pre 1998 declined despite being below the threshold of £2,311.

 

Would anyone please be able to offer me any advice?

 

I have applied for deferments of my student loan for all previous years and this has been agreed.

 

This year despite sending in the deferment form and proof that my income is only £1156 per month

i have been declined.

 

This causes me some concern as finding £150 per month at this time will be difficult.

 

Does any one have any idea why i was declined and how i may appeal ?

 

Many thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i thought thr threshold was £15k?

 

is this SLC themselves too?

 

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

Hi am new here so I hope this thread works and if has that I can find my back. The threshold is £15 000 for the post 1998 student loans (known as income contingent). Mine is known as a Mortgage style Loan. Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

i have a letter to say that payments are due on the 15th April - it only arrived on Saturday and it is with SLC. I also had a second envelope enclosing my deferment form with payslips which i had sent - the compliment slip said date as postmark and that required copies had been taken.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there,

 

I've just been refused deferment by SLC for the first time and my income is £825 every four weeks, if I include my partners, it's £1423 every four weeks for a family of five! They've just informed me (on Saturday) that they'll be deducting £154 per month from me starting on the 15th of April. Some notice!

 

Don't know if it's the right thing to do, but I'm going through SLC's Complaints Procedure to see why this has happened and to try and claim any money back which they take out of my account. I posted on this site for help but have yet to receive a reply.

 

I'm not very good with computers so can't put up link to complaints page but it's on their site. They are supposed to acknowledge your complaint within 5 days, provide written response within 15 days, if you're not happy get senior management review takes 15 days and if still not happy go to their Independant assessors. All days are working days. I've taken this route as you get no joy on the phone and they NEVER reply to your letters.

 

Hope this is some help although I don't really have the answer to our shared problem.

 

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi motogpmad

 

I rang the SLC this morning to ask why despite having my deferment application i had a letter to say they will be collecting payments from the 15.04.2012. I have been advised that since this letter was issued another has been issued to confirm my deferment. I strongly advise that you call too. In the mean time i have arranged to make voluntray payments equal to monthly interest charges in order that in 2 years time when i have the means to make repayments these will not be higher than the current level.

 

Best of luck and let us know how you get on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

Hello. I had a similar problem. The SLC refused to send me a deferment form even tho I was under the threshold for the mortgage style loans, They said it was because I was only allowed to defer for so many years and then I had to start paying it back regardless of whether I met the threshold or not. I spoke to two different people at SLC. So am I wondering if the whole call centre was told to tell people what I was told. Can you let me know if this is why u were refused. Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

you SURE its slc you were talking too

 

we have had many reports that link and arrows claim to be SLC

 

what is the number that calls you

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...