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

Totally confused - Freemans PPI


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4221 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,

 

I have been trying to reclaim the PPI that I was paying to Freemans.

 

I was honestly never asked if I wanted it and up until recently I thought it was standard and had to be on my account.

 

After writing several letters and then several more to chase any form of reply I have received the letter which I shall type below.

 

Does anyone have any advice as after hearing about other peoples PPI claims I feel disappointed now. Thanks

 

Dear X

 

I am in receipt of your letter dated 29 September 2012 regarding Payment Protection Insurance.

 

I can confirm that my investigations are now complete and I would like to make the following observations.

 

Our sales processes have always had regard to the legal requirements in force at the time.

 

As the policy was applied to your account on 16/05/00,

you will be aware the detailed rules currently enforced by the Financial Services Authority were not applicable at this time.

 

I can also confirm that cost to the customer was always part of the sales process and that full consent was always actively sought.

 

This was only obtained when the customer confirmed eligibility and suitability.

 

The polices we have previously sold have changed over time.

 

However, those which carried benefits associated with unemployment were equally valid for the self employed providing you worked 16 hours a week

or more and paid the correct National Insurance contributions.

 

Furthermore, every monthly statement you have received, where applicable,

always referred to the policy giving transparency of all transactions taking place on the account,

giving you the opportunity to review your account on a regular monthly basis and raise any matters you may wish to.

It has always been possible to cancel at any time, by whatever means, and without penalty.

 

Having considered all the matters raised, I regret to inform you that I am unable to uphold your complaint.

 

The issues you raise appear to fall outside the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service

owing to the length of time your policy has been in force.

You are, of course, at liberty to contact them and they may, in exceptional circumstances, waive the prescribed time limits.

 

In accordance with the legal requirements as they apply to the investigation of complaints, I must inform you this is my final response regarding this matter.

 

I understand this is not the outcome you have been looking for, but I hope that you understand the reasons for it.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

XXXXXX

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I have just started my claim with Freemans but looking at your reply I am not going to hold my breath.

 

The reasons I have give are I was not asked whether I already had sufficient cover in place at the time the policy was sold to me,

which I did, also I never received any terms or cons for me to check.

 

I worked Part time ( 15 hours pw) from 1996 until 1997 then was made redundant then worked part time (16 pw) 1998 to 1999

and left work to have my 2nd child and become a full time mum which I am still doing.

 

Freemans have come back to me confirming that I did pay PPI from 1995 to 2005 at which date I cancelled, may I add I really don't remember getting it never mind cancelling it.

 

What reasons did you give to make you feel you was mis sold?

 

and did they ever send you any terms through the post?

Link to post
Share on other sites

how did you apply for the refund?

 

it looks like you used the 'scatter-gun' approach

 

listing several 'faults' with their process.

 

ideally thats never a good idea .

 

did you use the FOS CQ?

 

an HOW was the PPI attached, or how did you apply for the account in the first place?

 

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 Pink,

 

I explained my reasons as

 

1. I dont think I was ever asked if I wanted it, it was just added to my statements, so I stupidly thought it was a charge that I had to pay.

2. I was in and out of work due to having a baby etc and I never worked more than 16 hours a week the whole time I had PPI.

 

It seems so wrong that you hear about everyone reclaiming their PPI and adverts saying mis-sold PPI must be repaid,

but then you get a response from Freemans that basically says go away your getting nothing!

 

I am sure I never had terms through the post as if I had realised it was optional I would have cancelled it straight away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dx,

 

I applied for the account by buying something from their catalogue. I think I did it on an order form in a magazine.

I did not see your post until after I had replied to Pinks post but I gave two reasons,

 

1. that I was not always in work and never worked more than 16 hours and

 

2. I was never asked if I actually wanted PPI.

 

Thx

Link to post
Share on other sites

did you use the FOS customer questionaire?

 

its prob not worth using the employment bit

 

but the fact that it was attached from your first catalogue order

 

without the choice of you wanting to opt for it or not is good enough reason

to refuse

 

they cant just turn around and say that

 

ask them to PROVE where you selected PPI with you first order

 

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...