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
      • 160 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

Natwest PPI Good Will Gesture


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4136 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 was wondering if anybody could answer my queries.

i wrote off to Natwest, enquiring if i was due any PPI from previous loans. They have wrote back to me with two loans i previously had, and a good will gesture. They claim that they cannot process any information from what was offered to me etc etc, your usual generic letter and therefore offer me this gesture. I personally see this as a way of fobbing me off because theyd rather entice me with this cash, than pay the full amount due. Here are the details

 

1) Jan 2008 - £1000 loan APR 28.1% (closed July 2008 - i assume that i payed this off with loan 2)

2) July 2008 - £1900 Loan APR 28.2%( closed Aug 2011)

 

On loan two, i had been paying 91.27 for 3 years and 1 month. In this time, i had claimed the insurance, which the bank paid out 4 times (due to being out of work).

 

They gesture they have offered me is as follows:

Total refund of PPI and associated interest paid to date: £267.98

Gross Interest: £44.82

Less Tax (20%): £8.96

Net Interest: £35.86

Total: £303.84

 

Of course, taking their offer would help me out now. But, i cant help but feel fobbed off. And although its not 1000's like many other peoples claims, even an extra 50-100 quid would be great in this day and age. Any help on my next steps would be greatly appreciated. Thank you

 

Jordan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok you can either SAR the lender to get the data or you can tell them to provide you with a detailed breakdown of how their figure is calculated.

 

If sending a SAR, add a line that says it is to include copies of all and any agreements you have had with them.

 

There is a template in the CAG library, the link to which is at the top of every CAG page in green. The cost is £10 and they will have 40 days to comply.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As suggested by ims I would recommend calculating what the redress should be yourself.

 

Following my PPI complaint RBS (Natwest) made an offer that was some way short of what I had calculated. After a bit of back and forth (and them not budging) this is now with the FOS.

 

I strongly suspect that they are making low offers safe in the knowledge that a high proportion of people will just accept on the basis that either they don't have the time or inclination to calculate an accurate figure themselves or because they would rather settle for a lower sum without further aggravation or having to wait longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...