Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • no that is not a defence. because you don't have a photo
    • I purchased the vehicle using finance through motonovo under a HP 60 months agreement. I have now amended the document ensuring all is in black. Unfortunately, this email has now been sent. However, I have not sent a letter to big motoring world. Also, I have taken the section of the firealarm issue. I am struggling to convert to PDF. I am not tech savy at all. My mistake was that the the salesman was very fussy on a sale. We went down a quiet road for a little test drive and not for a lengthy road test. The water issue was not present at this moment of time. However, it only became prevalent after driving away, after all docs signed. I did stated to Audi I wanted a diagnostic report. However, they carried out an Audicam which is footage of the issue. Audi have diagnosed the issue as a common issue where coupes/cabriolets accumulate water in the seals. However, I did state beforehand for no issue to be rectified due to me wanting to reject the vehicle. I am awaiting a report from Audi through email from the branch manager in relation to the issue. The issue so far is the water still being present in the sills. Audi tried to fix the issue however the problem is still prevalent. Regards 
    • First begging letter received from Overdales   ;Blah blah blah, our client's are going to win this blah blah blah we supplied all your documents under CPR   PS you can stop all this by paying £1200 less in a lump sum
    • Right,  so the court hasn't send out the Directions Questionnaires/N180s yet. PE's one is a false one, meant to intimidate you into thinking your defence was rubbish and they are confident with their claim. This is par for the course.  The PPCs do this regularly. However, PE have gone further and written that "a copy has also been filed with the court" which is a lie as the court haven't even sent out the papers yet. Keep a screenshot of MCOL, later on in your WS you can draw attention to their lying and abuse of court procedure. If you've got time on your hands, then complain to the BPA about one of their members lying.    
  • 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

DMP and PPI


M'n'M
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4267 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 we (My wife and I) need some advice.

 

We are in a joint DMP with payplan and it is going well as far as making regular payments, payment history and generally hassles from all creditors.

 

Some debts go as far back as 2007 (point of initial Default).

 

We are being plagued with PPI claim outfits (because of our credit history and status being sold we presume).

 

Some of our debts had PPI which to us implies the outstanding amount could be unrealistic.

We also have records (limited not full) of PPI's in force dated 2005 is it possible to make a claim for these.

 

We realise that any success at claiming will come off our debt where creditors are concerned.

We have the option of using "Stake your Claim" part of PayPlan to assess the claims even the non creditor ones.

 

What we were wondering is if we do this and claim via stake your claim which seems the logical step would they be able to retain any Monies from non creditors to put towards out DMP without our consent.

 

Any help would be appreciated

 

M'n'M

Two account claims.

US

Them

2 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)'s sent 14/08/06 (recieved 15/08/06).

2 Microfiche (foboff) letters and 2 sets of statements (14 months worth) recieved 24/08/06.

2 Microfiche counter letters sent 29/08/06 (recieved 30/08/06).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do it yourself! Have a look at the PPI forum! Any money back can only be used to offset against notifed arrears only! So a PPI claim from HSBC cannot be used against a Lloyds TSB account.

Still on the lookout for buried treasure!

 

Any advice I give here is based on my own experiences throughout my life, career and training and should not be taken as accurate. If in doubt, speak to someone more qualified - a Solicitor, Citizens Advice to name but two possible avenues!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply, it seems like a mindfield just like bank charges (our cases for that were unsuccesful).

 

We have a limited number of Credit card statments which show PPI, alas we don't have enough to make an informed amount to claim, a SAR will only go back 6 years I believe 3 accounts were cleared in august 2005, which is really annoying.

Some of the claim companies are advertising going back 10 in a claim.

 

We are really at a loss of what to do.

 

Thanks for the advice

Two account claims.

US

Them

2 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)'s sent 14/08/06 (recieved 15/08/06).

2 Microfiche (foboff) letters and 2 sets of statements (14 months worth) recieved 24/08/06.

2 Microfiche counter letters sent 29/08/06 (recieved 30/08/06).

Link to post
Share on other sites

..........

 

We have a limited number of Credit card statments which show PPI, alas we don't have enough to make an informed amount to claim, ........

 

seems that you may well do. creds are obliged to investigate the ppi when a ppi complaint is submitted. see then what they come back with

Edited by Ford
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...