Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • best to be sure it is a N279. not that they pull any underhand stunts of course   but we have seen it. your bal is now £0 but we'll still attend court as you'll probably not as we've said we've closed the account and we'll get a judgement by default. dx  
    • Sorry, last bit They had ticked that they wanted the application dealt with without a hearing, so is there any relevance that a date and time to attend said hearing has been sent out ?
    • I've not seen it personally but I think that's the letter Dad has had from Overdales. I'll see it tomorrow. It states balance: zero
    • Agreed as you clearly have little faith in your star runners, mind you - I have less - conditional on the welcher clause I defined being part, and that we are talking about the three defined candidates: Tice Farage and Anderson - not anyone anywhere as reform might (outside chance) get someone decent to run somewhere. If any of the three dont run - they count as a loss.   welcher clause. "If either of us loses and doesn't pay - we agree the site admin will change the welchers avatar permanently to a cows ass - specific cows ass avatar chosen by the winner - with veto by site on any too offensive - requiring another to be chosen  (or of course, DP likely allows you can delete your account and all your worthless posts to cheapskate chicken out and we'll just laugh) "
    • This is the full details, note they have made an error (1) in that paragraph 5 stated 14 days before hearing not 7. Surely a company of their size would proof read and shouldn't make basic errors like that 1) The Claimant respectfully applies for an extension of time to comply with paragraph 5 of the Order of Deputy District Judge XXX dated XX March 2024 i.e. the evidence upon which the parties intend to rely shall be filed and served not later than 7-days before the hearing. 2) The Claimant seeks a short extension of time allow them to further and properly investigate data provided to them by Royal Mail which is of importance to the proceedings and determination of the Claim. 3) The Claimant and Royal Mail have an information sharing agreement. Under the agreement, Royal Mail has provided data to the Claimant in respect of the matters forming the basis of these proceedings. The Claimant requires more time to consider this data and reconcile it against their own records. The Claimant may need to seek clarification and assurances from Royal Mail before they can be confident the data is correct and relevant to the proceedings i.e. available to be submitted as evidence. 4) The Claimant's witness is currently out of the office on annual leave and this was not relayed to DWF Law until after the event which has caused a further unfortunate delay. 5) The Court has directed parties to file and serve any evidence upon which they intend to rely not later than 14- days before the hearing i.e. by 4pm on 6 June 2024. Regrettably, the Claimant will have insufficient time to finalise their witness evidence and supporting exhibits as directed. We therefore respectfully apply to extend the time for filing/serving evidence so that the evidence upon which the parties intend to rely by filed and served not later than 7-days before the hearing i.e. by 4pm on 13 June 2024. 6) This application is a pre-emptive one for an extension of time made prior to the expiry of the deadline. In considering the application, the Court is required to exercise its broad case management powers and consider the overriding objective. 7) In circumstances where applications are made in time, the Court should be reticent to refuse reasonable applications for extensions of time which neither imperil hearing dates nor disrupt proceedings, pursuant to Hallam Estates v Baker [2014] EWCA Civ 661. 😎 It is respectfully submitted that the application is made pursuant to the provisions of CPR 3.1(2)(a) and in accordance with the overriding objective to ensure the parties are on an equal footing when presenting their cases to the Court. The requested extension of time does not put the hearing at risk and granting the Application will not be disruptive to the proceedings.   They have asked for extension Because 2) The Claimant requires additional time to consider and reconcile data received from Royal Mail which is relevant to these proceedings against their own data and records in order to submit detailed evidence in support of this Claim.
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Shop Direct - help with Extra Care 500 & Extra Care Advantage reclaiming POC


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4211 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

Ok, I am happy with the POC.

 

Just need advice with the Claim form... In the value section... Am I on the right track here?

 

Payment Protection Insurance premiums paid £186.47.

Compound Interest £68.84.

Interest under s69 of the county court Act 1984 of £78.41 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment/settlement at a daily rate of £0.05. TOTAL £306.64

Thanks

 

(fiquires are examples, ignore calcs)

Edited by TheDude1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Have sent an S.O.S. for more opinions for you.

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

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks citizenB.

 

Basically I need confirmation on the following:

 

For example,

First PPI payment on the 01/01/2006.

Account was closed 30/06/2008.

 

Claim total premiums back

Claim compound interest (at lenders rate) from 01/01/2006 to 30/06/2008.

Claim 8% S69 from 31/06/2008 to date of issue.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Claim 8% S69 from 31/06/2008 to date of issue.

 

Should be to judgment

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Claim 8% S69 from 31/06/2008 to date of issue.

 

Should be to judgment

 

Thanks, I have worded it like this...seems to be correct!

 

"Interest under s69 of the county court Act 1984 of £69.78 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment/settlement at a daily rate of £0.05"

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes better.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK so if you have done the LBA, how long did you give them to respond because you said that you sent it last week?

 

Hi ims, sorry letter was sent on the 26/06, signed for on the 28/06 - Sorry I got my dates wrong. Yes, I give them 7 days before court action, so basically a week today I am free to issue :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks ims, yes they are quite ignorant!

 

The claim is on behalf of my 85yr old gran !! I'm not sure which way to proceed now.

I know there is PPI premiums paid, and I also know it was mis-sold to an 80 year old.

 

I'm thinking perhaps it would be best to go the FOS route on this one? Then again, I know FOS is slow and would prefer court route, but only if I could represent my gran then I'll be up for it !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that you could attend with her but you wouldn't be allowed to act for her.

 

To avoid the stress to your gran then fos might be a better route for you.

 

It may be that due to her age and the stress this is causing her they may look at it quicker than normal for you. Worth a try.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang on a mo.

 

You haven't yet put in a claim for PPI with the lender from what I can see.

 

That would be your first step for the PPI claim but at the moment you can't quantify the amount because the SAR has not been complied with. So complete the questionnaire and send it to the lender and they will have 8 weeks before you can pass it to fos.

 

Now with the non compliance with the SAR, it is the Information Commissioner's Office that you lodge a complaint with. Again tell them of your gran's circumstances and that you cannot move forward with your problem until the lender complies with the DPA and you would request their assistance in forcing compliance.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks ims!

 

Your are correct - No claim for ppi has ever been sent to the lender.

 

You are correct with the SAR also, I do not have individual amounts, only 'total paid to date' amount.

 

When you say complete questionaire....Ambrose Wilson have never sent my gran a questionaire. In fact, in one of their letters they deny insurance was ever applied to the account! (Which is a lie).

 

So I have no questionaire to complete, should I just proceed with the ICO complaint?

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry...we are confused.

 

On the fos website there is a consumer ppi questionnaire....its on this page

 

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/ppi.html

 

download it and complete it and then send it to the catalogue company with a brief covering letter saying here's my complaint documents, give me my money back. Make sure you keep copies for yourself.

 

The ICO is the one for the non compliance of SAR complaint.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I confused it all and myself :-)

 

Ok, I will do that ppi questionaire and send to lender! (I was just unaware the same questionaire can be used to send to lender, thats what confused me!)

 

I know the ICO is mainly for DPA problems. And I assume the ICO will not be required at all now due to it either being settled by lender or by FOS?

 

Thanks again mate :tea:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fos questionnaire always goes to the lender first. If you get a negative response then copies of what has gone to the lender go to fos. You only need to complete it once :-)

 

I would still lodge a formal complaint with the ICO to get them to force the release of SAR data.

 

Don't forget, the PPI claim and the SAR disclosure are two separate things.

 

Don't worry...we'll get there

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

TheDude1 ... any updates re this?

Current Debt : Approx £LOTS :-( ........................................................................Estimated Debt Free : Nov 2014 :-D

 

Barclaycard (wife) £1,080.43 Refunded

Barclaycard (me) SAR in progress

Shop Direct (x3 accounts) SAR completed. Claiming £3389.37 charges and £3,500 PPI

MBNA ..........SAR in progress. Charges & PPI from 1996 - present!

 

Your next ----> Lloyds Mastercard x2 - OPUS - Coop Visa - Monument Visa - RBS Visa - Cap One Visa x2 - Redcats x2

Link to post
Share on other sites

TheDude1 ... any updates re this?

 

Hi mate,

prelim & lba were sent a few weeks ago, they are looking into it and have stated to give them 8 weeks, which will be roughly end of august.

 

But I don't hold much hope of them 'sorting it' and giving me a refund... To which I will issue a claim!

 

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Hi

Just an update!

 

I sent the FOS questionnaire to Ambrose Wilson about 2 months ago.

This week my gran received the cheque!

 

However, it appears they have only refunded the premiums paid and not included any interest. I'll see my gran soon to get the actual figures to confirm this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Shop Direct - help with Extra Care 500 & Extra Care Advantage reclaiming POC
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...