Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx for your feedback. That is the reason I posted my opinion, because I am trying to learn more and this is one of the ways to learn, by posting my opinions and if I am incorrect then being advised of the reasons I am incorrect. I am not sure if you have educated me on the points in my post that would be incorrect. However, you are correct on one point, I shall refrain from posting on any other thread other than my own going forward and if you think my post here is unhelpful, misleading or in any other way inappropriate, then please do feel obliged to delete it but educate me on the reason why. To help my learning process, it would be helpful to know what I got wrong other than it goes against established advice considering the outcome of a recent court case that seemed to suggest it was dismissed due to an appeal not being made at the first stage. Thank-you.  
    • you can have your humble opinion.... You are very new to all this private parking speculative invoice game you have very quickly taken it upon yourself to be all over this forum, now to the extent of moving away from your initial thread with your own issue that you knew little about handling to littering the forum and posting on numerous established and existing threads, where advice has already been given or a conclusion has already resulted, with your theories conclusions and observations which of course are very welcomed. BUT... in some instances, like this one...you dont quite match the advice that the forum and it's members have gathered over a very long consensual period given in a tried and trusted consistent mannered thoughtful approach. one could even call it forum hi-jacking and that is becoming somewhat worrying . dx
    • Yeah, sorry, that's what I meant .... I said DCBL because I was reading a few threads about them discontinuing claims and getting spanked in court! Meant  YOU  Highview !!!  🖕 The more I read this forum and the more I engage with it's incredible users, the more I learn and the more my knowledge expands. If my case gets to court, the Judge will dismiss it after I utter my first sentence, and you DCBL and Highview don't even know why .... OMG! .... So excited to get to court!
    • Though it would be Highview you would  pursue. DCBL are nonentities-on their best day,
    • Yep, I read that and thought about trying to find out what the consideration and grace period is at Riverside but not sure I can. I know they say "You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is"  but I doubt they would disclose it to the public, maybe I should have asked in my CPR 31.14 letter? Yes, I think I can get rid of 5 minutes. I am also going to include a point about BPA CoP: 13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place. I think that is Deception .... They giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other! One other point to note, the more I read, the more I study, the more proficient I feel I am becoming in this area. Make no mistake DBCL if you are reading this, when I win in court, if I have the grounds to make any claims against you, such as breach of GDPR, I shall be doing so.
  • 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

Natwest persistantly obstructing me over suplying data concerning a PPI Reclaim


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4090 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 a credit card with Natwest that I have tried to claim PPI refund for. I took the card out in 1997. They have provided me a copy of the application form under a s78(1) which shows that the account included "credit card repayment protection"

 

I belive I cancelled the PPI in 2001.

 

Natwest have said that they have no record of me making any PPI payments and so have denied my clain. I have no evidence to say I did either, other than knowing I cancelled PPI on all accounts in 2001 when I was made redundant as I was a contractor and no-one paid out.

 

I SAR'd Natwest, who have sent me statements back til December 2005 (after 55 days). They have also sent me copies of some letters I have written to them, but by no means all. I asked to telephone transcripts, but they have said they wont send them unless I tell them the date and time I want the transcripts for.

 

Finally, they have sent me no data at all about the running of my account. I imagine Natwest (like Barclaycard) must have some sort of customer management system, that tells them how I run my account, credit limits, over limit dates and times etc. but they claim that they do not and they have sent me all the data they are required to. Even the notes on my account are simply typed up, but with no date/time attached to them.

 

I find it difficult to believe that Natwest holds so little data on me. Can anyone tell me if they have had more luck getting data out of Natwest or suggest what to do next?

 

My plan is to notify the Information comissioner of Natwest's refusal to provide information, but I dont want to do that if this REALLY is all there is.

 

I would like to complain to the FOS about the PPI, but I dont want them to be able to produce "evidence" that I cancelled the PPI the day after I got the credit card. Im fairly certain I didnt do that, as I was naieve back then and thought it was useful.

 

Any help would be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Banks are being very difficult in that they say they won't provide information beyond six years although there are strong suspicions that they do hold it.

 

I'd send them the failed SAR letter from the CAG library.

 

There is an option to sue to force compliance if you feel that they have older data and want to push hard for it

 

The ICO is the other way to go

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...

In a long running saga with Natwest,

 

I applied for a PPI refund over a year ago.

 

I have the original application form that shows PPI was on the credit card application form.

 

Natwest wrote back to ask for statements to show it was paid.

 

I obviously don't have any (the card was opened in 2000).

 

I did an SAR to Natwest for all info, and they sent just copies of statements but took nearly 60 days to respond.

 

I went back to them, asking them to provide all information Id originally asked for.

 

They said they had, but later 'found' a few more statements, and sent me copies of a few letters and a typed dated document

with about 10 entries on it which had basic notes about my account.

 

I complained to ICO who have issued a letter saying the Natwest did not comply with my SAR and asking them to look at it again.

 

I want to write to Natwest again now,

asking again for ALL information about my account.

 

I particularly want a copy of the data they hold about me in the Customer Management System.

(Does anyone know what Natwest call this?)

 

A similar SAR to Barclaycard resulted in over 100 pages of detailed print out of their customer management system giving account status over the full term of the account.

 

Natwest in one of their letters claim they have a 'system' that tells them that I never had PPI insurance. I want details from this 'system' also.

 

They have contradicted themselves in some of their letters, saying either can I send evidence as they can find no details, to saying they have evidence that I never paid it, despite it being on the application form)

 

Finally, Natwest have now reduced my credit limit saying it received 'data'.

 

Are they required to give me this data, and can I also ask them to show how they calculated that I was now an increased risk?

 

Can anyone suggest what I should ask them for?

 

Thanks in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep do so an include that ICO letter too

 

disgusting behaviour.

 

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

two threads merged

title changed & linked to NW twitter feed.

 

lets shame them into action!

 

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

about 13p per £100 outstanding

 

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

  • 2 months later...

Well, the saga continues. The Information Commissioner has ruled that Natwest hasnt complied with my subject access request (in November) and suggested to them that within 28 days they provide a full response. It is now 9th February and still nothing from them, despite many letters, phone calls and emails.

 

I am about to file a claim in the small claims court demanding that they perform a complete disclosure. I would like some advice on the terms Natwest uses if possible as well as information on what I can (and can not ask for)

 

I want a complete listing of information they hold about me in their customer management system. Does anyone know what Natwest calls it? So far, they have given me two pages of typed up notes with details of calls I have made but nothing else.

 

I also want the data they used to calculate my credit score when they reduced my credit limit. They claim that the formula they use is commercially sensitive and so is exempt for release (I am assuming that this is correct) but surely my personal data that they put into the formula isnt and should be released?

 

As I have mentioned previously, they claim to have a 'system' that indicates I have never had PPI on my account, yet I have the original application form that shows I did have PPI. Does anyone know the name of this system so I can request all details from it?

 

I know that simply asking for ALL data should be sufficient, but Natwest seem to be going out of their way to make sure I dont see this data (im not sure why and maybe im just being paranoid) so I want to be as specific as I can be so they dont later say 'well you didnt ask for that' when they bring out some other data that I have never seen.

 

Thanks in advance

 

Rich

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Rich,

 

I never went to court but got a load of PPI refunds via the FOS. If NATWEST are playing the difficult "Not us" game send all the info you have all the paperwork, loan agreements, everything you have to the FOS. Please see here for more information...http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?135060-Mis-sold-PPI-Want-your-money-back-use-these-links-to-help

 

All the banks and I have claimed mis sold PPI from a few will try and fob you off, stall you, in the hope you will get fed up and give in. They will make life difficult, mis inform you, and generally give you misleading information.

 

It is important that you stay cool and fight back with tenacity. You must make them pay back the money they owe you from mis selling PPI.

 

Keep at them.

 

aa

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

------------------------------------------------

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...