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

Clarification please on cpl of basic points of PPI reclaim process


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4114 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 am going through the guidelines here on reclaiming PPI in order to get a good grasp of what is involved before going ahead. I am not sure on a couple of fundamental points, and would appreciate some steering please.

 

The PPI relates to a credit card I have held since 2002.

 

I note from the letter-templates here and from other documents that you are required to specify the reason why you feel the insurance was mis-sold,

and also that you should ideally (must?) claim a particular sum that you believe is the amount involved.

 

When I applied for the card I believe it was with a form received through the post.

I no longer have any memory nor a copy of that form as it was so long ago now,

so can not recall precisely what was asked nor what specific details I filled-in.

 

I was not *sold* the insurance, but would have ticked an appropriate option-box to accept it as before the whole PPI issue blew up

I always felt that the built-in cover was a good thing to have in case of hard times.

 

I assume that either there was an amount of information their on the form telling applicants what the insurance covered and exclusions/circumstances etc.,

or that its equivalent was provided with subsequent paperwork.

 

I also assume just now that the card issuer would today lean on the ticked acceptance box as indicating that they had made me properly aware of all relevant particulars,

and that I had acknowledged them and agreed.

 

The reality however is probably closer to the fact that if I had been presented with the normal microscopic T&Cs section/sheet,

I probably wouldn't have given them much of a glance at all.

 

I would like to think that there is an element of common-sense somewhere, such as a concept of "reasonable expectations"

when it comes to people's understandable oversight when it comes to the endless small-print on forms for example, but I am not holding my breath ...

 

With this information therefore, I now have three questions.

 

1 - As I have to specify a mis-sold reason, and whether just for that purpose or also to have accurate information now anyway which would seem very sensible,

can I get a copy of my application now to see just what I was being offered and how I applied?

If not, then I don't see how I can even check for mis-selling and then specify a basis for claiming in the first place.

 

2 - Does the provision of printed particulars of the insurance - whether on that form or in a subsequent document

- constitute *selling* in the same way that a for-real person would be supposed to point out to you the effect of such things

as pre-existing medical conditions, unemployment/retirement, alternative insurances, and other things that are widely given as mis-selling reasons .

 

.. and does ticking their box at the time mean that all was known-about and understood so legally there was no mis-selling?

 

3 - I do not have any way at all of calculating how much I have paid in monthly PPI charges over the life of the account as I do not have my statements going back all those years.

 

I couldn't even guessstimate even if I wished to, as the monthly amount varies anyway of course according to the card balance.

 

I am sure I am not alone in not keeping statements going back to the year dot however,

so what is the approach taken to arrive at the figure you are claiming?

 

Maybe there is an industry-formula, though I can't immediately see how that would be possible given the extremes of people's credit-spending and repayment habits ...

 

Any guidance would be welcomed as just now I do not readily see how I can even formulate a claim.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you are doing what everyone does...speculating.

 

you need to SAR the original creditors

 

and get all the paperwork FIRST

 

then start unspeculating.!!

 

it is always best to show that you KNOW what you are going on about

providing [an approx] idea of the level of reclaim shows that.

 

as for the reasons of claim.. it is a good idea to outline WHY you think it was mis-sold

though ..PERS i do not adhere to the scatter-gun approach , of using every availiable 'reason' - yet.

 

as for the tick boxes

 

it is well known and with credit cards that many were ALREADY ticked!!

 

SAR time my friend

 

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

Thank you dx!

 

I was not aware of the SAR process, and have jut this minute quickly clicked a link or two first to see what you are referring to and it seems to be just what is needed.

 

Reflecting your own comments, my concern was that in order to make a reasoned claim you must determine both whether there actually is a basis for claiming in the first place, and then also the amount involved. I had yet to see how to be able to get at the facts that would make this possible, and now I will take steps and send a SAR letter but may I ask just a couple of quick related questions ...

 

What is actually received, and in what form? As an example, from the wording of the sample letter "all information" suggests that this could include either photocopies of all statements or a summary of that same activity/charges in some other form. One way or another this is exactly what is needed in order to calculate the claim amount of course, however copy-statements would be better than wading through 11 years of computer-printout wallpaper!

 

Similarly, "all information" suggests that it should include my original application info, however if this does not come in the form of a photocopy of the original document but as data-entry printouts showing the information as entered on to their system at the time of application/approval, it would not for example show the existence of a pre-ticked box on the application form if there was one.

 

Copes of originals would seem to be the best, however I can also imagine that for the firms involved it would be far easier/lazier just to do a filedump ... which I have to say would then also make me concerned for just how accurate/complete their data-entry had been.

 

Would the provided info include a copy of the T&Cs at the time of taking out the insurance? I am not sure whether this info would be useful to me, however I don't now have that paperwork and would want to take steps to re-acquire it if it is actually possible and if it might be useful. Do you know this?

 

Thanks again for the SAR pointer, much appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you request the original CCA (Credit Card) agreement, you will see the original form, and whether every box has been ticked or not, along with signatures and staff names.

 

The response of the SAR will be a cover sheet, plus reprints of every statement requested. Sometime they duplicate pages, and sometimes they miss a couple. Other times, they print double-sided You can request the missing pages if they have not been provided. It doesn't take too long to go through these pages. You are really only looking for several things; the monthly PPI payment, the total amount on your credit card, how much money was spent that month, and how much you paid. All these go into a single row of the spreadsheet table, one row per month.

Then you have a grand total of how much PPI was paid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...