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

Mate vs Santander


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4426 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

A good friend of mine had PPI on a substantial loan with Santander.

They have recently written to him to say he had PPI and may have a claim as the banks now have to do.

He was considering filling out the forms but I told him to hold fire until WE can work out the figures first!

At first he was not up for claiming as he said he took the PPI as insurance for the loan but he is now not happy with the fact that he may have been able to purchase it cheaper from someone else etc.

 

I have not looked at his paperwork yet but have a couple of general questions.

Do Santander try and defend aggressively (like Cap1)

Do they normally front load PPI?

he said off the top of his head the PPI was 9K or so!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

A good friend of mine had PPI on a substantial loan with Santander.

They have recently written to him to say he had PPI and may have a claim as the banks now have to do.

He was considering filling out the forms but I told him to hold fire until WE can work out the figures first!

At first he was not up for claiming as he said he took the PPI as insurance for the loan but he is now not happy with the fact that he may have been able to purchase it cheaper from someone else etc.

 

I have not looked at his paperwork yet but have a couple of general questions.

Do Santander try and defend aggressively (like Cap1)

 

Probably not as much although there are a lot of banks trying to wriggle at the moment

 

Do they normally front load PPI?

 

Depends on the loan...some are single premium front loaded, others are separate payments made alongside the loan, such as in mortgages etc.

 

he said off the top of his head the PPI was 9K or so!!!

 

Blimey....nice little windfall coming back to him then

 

 

Hi Greg

 

See my replies in red

 

Sight of the agreement will tell you whether this is single premium, front loaded PPI.

 

If it was single premium you can add to the list of mis-selling criteria that the true cost would almost certainly not have been explained to him.

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had a look at his papers and he needs some additional information I think.

They have sent their own version of the FOS questionaire which is pretty much identical except they have tick boxes for reasons for mis-selling that you can choose from.

We have calculated up to the point where he paid off early but we dont know what the final payment was or how much of it was PPI if any?

He had PPI added to the loan amount but it was clearly broken down into how much of the monthly payment was PPI and how much it would cost total including interest.

 

I think he should fill out the form and tell them he believes he was mis-sold due to them not telling him he could have got it cheaper elsewhere and see what they come back with.

This will cost nothing and get us some numbers to question/compare.

So far it looks like we got £700 interest to add the the 3.5K he did pay up to the early repayment date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Greg

 

You might be able to work out what the PPI settlement was. Have you got the agreement or details from it?

 

Also, if your going to use the lenders copy of the questionnaire, feel free to put on an additional page if you want to expand on any mis-selling reason. Personally, I'd use the fos one myself and again you can additional sheets if required.

 

Also I would not take a flyer with just one mis-selling reason and see what comes back. Check that there are not others that would apply (I bet there are).

 

For example, was the true cost of the PPI explained given that it was added to the loan and would paid for over the life of the loan with interest. Did they carry out a needs assessment? There are usually at least two or three mis-selling criteria that would apply.

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You might be able to work out what the PPI settlement was. Have you got the agreement or details from it? We do have the agreement

 

Also, if your going to use the lenders copy of the questionnaire, feel free to put on an additional page if you want to expand on any mis-selling reason. Personally, I'd use the fos one myself and again you can additional sheets if required.We will include extras plus a covering letter

 

Also I would not take a flyer with just one mis-selling reason and see what comes back. Check that there are not others that would apply (I bet there are).

 

For example, was the true cost of the PPI explained given that it was added to the loan and would paid for over the life of the loan with interest. Did they carry out a needs assessment? There are usually at least two or three mis-selling criteria that would apply.

We will try and get 2 or 3 on the go then

 

I think I need to convince him a bit more on how pushy we will need to be as he is a bit reluctant to be too pushy.

The agreement breaks the loan down into loan amount and interest as well as PPI amount and interest and splits total cost of loan and total cost of PPI.

He doesnt remember much about the selling of the PPI as it was 2006.

 

I think our reasons are:

Not advised he could have purchased elsewhere.

Led to believe it was required for the large loan amount. (large risk)

Not asked if he had other means of covering the debt. (good company sick scheme).

No needs assessment carried out.

Not asked whether he had any other insurance which would cover the loan.

Not told of any exclusions that may have applied.(full T&C of the PPI)

There may be more!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...