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

Egg PPI on Credit Card - Got my SAR, What to do now? HELP


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4214 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

Hi

 

This is what I am putting on my FOS form, what do you think:

 

I purchased the above policy from you in November 1999 but now believe that I was mis-sold this policy for the following reason :

This is due to the fact that I was not given the correct information when the policy was sold to me, as

having recently looked at the paperwork for my credit card I now realise that I have been paying for insurance that I did not know I had taken out so could not have been explained to me.

AND

at the time of applying for this egg card on line the PPI box was pre ticked. I therefore HAD to take it in order for my application to progress.I did not want and I DID NOT TICK a box to agree to the payment of this PPI.

Unless you can satisfactorily justify to me that the policy was fair and reasonable I am requesting a full refund of all premiums, and subsequent interest on these payments, that I have paid to date. As I believe I have been deprived of this money I also expect 8% statutory interest, the amount a court would award, to be added to each payment made.

I look forward to a full and prompt response to this request and payment of my PPI and for the matter to be concluded within eight weeks or I shall be contacting the Financial Ombudsman AS NUMEROUS OTHER CUSTOMERS HAVE to investigate my complaint.

Is this similar to what others have written and won.

 

Also although I had an Egg card to November 2007, Egg stopped taking PPI payments from me in November 2005 and I never cancelled it. Should I put the following also:

 

In November 2005 Egg stopped taking PPI from my account and I didn't cancel it. I propose that Egg stopped taking these payments from me as they realized they had miss-sold this policy to me as they never obtained my permission or properly advised me about this PPI as they were legally required to do?

 

What do you think, should I also add this final bit?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi

 

I got my reply from Egg and they are not upholding my complaint.

 

They said:

 

After carrying out a review of my account, they had established that I purchased the insurance through Egg website on October 1999 and

 

Our online sales process:

 

  • Does not require you to take repayment protection insurance as a condition
    of obtaining a card
  • Does not provide an advisory service
  • Required you to positively confirm that you wished to purchase the policy
    during the online application
  • Provided full terms and conditions of the policy and requested you read them
    before submitting

They said that this is their final correspondence on the issue with me and they consider the complaint closed.

 

Now it is interesting that they say their on-line sales process DOES NOT require you to take our the insurance, should it not say it did not require you to take out the insurance, they are talking about the present, I am talking about the past.

 

Anyway, what now, should I write off to them again or is it time to submit a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman. If I do what do I send of to them? Would it be the questionnaire and spreadsheet that I submitted to Egg?

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jellynose,

 

Good luck with your claim.

 

I'm just starting my Egg claim as I had to wait ages to receive my SAR. Can I ask you a couple of quick questions please, who did you address your claim letter to? and did you send it to the Pride Park address?

 

Many thanks and again, good luck, I'll be watching your thread with interest :-)

 

Up2

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...