Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

PPP Advice please?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4082 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

I have recently receieved documents as a result of a SAR. Amongst the documents I have the Underwriting Sheet.

On the form in a box marked '% Equity' box are the abbreviations OMV, ERRP and the term 'Net of PPP'.

They appear as follows:

85.00 OMV 84.55

ERRP 89.42

Net of PPP 84.55

Can anyone please explain (in fairly simple language) what the abbreviations and the term 'Net of PPP' mean please? I am particularly interested in the Net of PPP but any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they 'should' in the SAR provide a guide to their abbreviations

 

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

  • 1 month later...

I took out a loan in 2002. The broker was HFS Loans Ltd. The lender was Igroup Mortgages Ltd (now GE Money).

I subsequently got PPI cover through MMS Ltd which I now realise I did not need.

I have sent a claim to Igroup who have replied saying they have no record of PPI being associated with this account.

They say that whilst GE Money provided the finance for the loan, they did not sell it to me. 'This was taken out through Capital One Home Owner Loans Ltd' who they state are no longer trading and that I would need to identify and contact the company administrators to make any claim.

I have obtained all the paperwork from GE Money and there is no mention of Capital One Home Owner Loans Ltd.

Who should I claim from? I am totally confused.

Any advice would be greatfully received. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

moved to the ppi forum

 

you'll find this is the std ans on any ge money ppi claim

 

 

and as its igroup we've had successes too.

 

you need to question them regarding section 56 of the cca

 

type in ge money in our search

and have a read up

 

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

  • 3 months later...

Further to the above.

I have now found out that the PPI was arranged through HFS (taken over by Capital One Home Owner Loans Ltd) who no longer trade.

I have an Igroup form signed by me to say that I do not require PPI so I do not understand or remember why I have it through HFS unless they insisted I have it in order to get the loan.

I have the underwriting sheet which shows that Igroup paid a £1000 broker fee.

Do I still have a claim against GE Money (Igroup) or what should I do?

The underwriting sheet dated May 2002 states 'unregulated'. Does that make a difference to anything?

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes go get em

 

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

go try

 

unknown

 

still doesn't excuse PPI mis-selling

 

there are NO get outs for them

 

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...