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

EGG PPI Claim - say i had a rebate ...did I?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4112 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 just had a very similar offer from Canada Square Operations who I believe have taken over from Egg Banking.

 

My offer also deducted an amount of around £2,600 for a "rebate previously paid or applied to my account", of which I have no knowledge. Is it worth challenging this amount, surely if I have made payment of around £4,100 on premiums I am entitled to receive that full amount back with the interest payable?

 

Any thoughts appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

have you sar'd them

or have you gone with a claims company [hope not]

 

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

After seeing your post, I went back to the paperwork they sent me after my SAR and checked

(although perhaps I should've done that before returning the signed acceptance form! :-) ) and here's what I found:

 

The PPI Premium that was applied according to the Application Report (and the figures in the letter) was £5071.13

On another page titled Account Information Report there's a Loan PPI Rebate with the following:

 

Account Number: xxxxxxxxxxx

Rebate Description: PPI PREMIUM - EGG LOANS

Amount Paid: 2471.64

Current Reb: 0.00

Chge Date: 01/07/2006

Term: 84

Co/Dlr#: 2

Cd: 3

Amount Earned: 2471.64

 

If you subtract the above number from the PPI Premium you get: £2599.49 which is the amount they stated as 'rebate' in their letter.

 

Their explanation in the letter was:

This is a previous rebate(s) paid to your loan as a result of your PPI being cancelled

or would have been included as part of the settlement figure(s) on early closure of your account(s)

 

In my case,

I settled my loan early and I do remember speaking to them and asking them to pay it off over the phone there and then

and I was told that they would send me a letter with the settlement figure as it was not what I could see on their website.

 

I also remember being (foolishly as it turns out) quite happy that the settlement figure was substantially lower than what I thought I had to pay.

 

I cannot remember the details, but it all makes sense to me now. (although it won't be the first time that my calculations were wrong! :-) )

 

I hope this helps, but if you do challenge them and find out that they have been BS'ing us let us know!

 

 

Theo

Link to post
Share on other sites

I originally claimed (myself) in June 2012 and received an acknowledgement from Egg at that time. I sent a reminder in August, then another in November and in the November letter I indicated that I would submit a SAR request if need be. I then got a letter dated 15 January 2013 (received by me on 26 January) which they claim to have already sent to me in July last year and I never received, which is my offer letter with acceptance form attached.

 

I just feel that since I physically paid the sum of £4.1k plus interest of around £350, I should at least receive that full amount back together with the 8% compensatory interest they offer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I'm hardly an expert I would advise to submit a SAR anyway and have a look at the numbers yourself. Also, you don't mention whether you settled the loan early or cancelled the PPI or anything like that. Although you did physically pay £4.1 plus interest, as I explained above you probably got some back when (and if) you settled the loan early.

 

As I understand it, say you took a loan out for £10k and they added £5k PPI on top. You'd be paying the interest for the £15k for the duration of your payments. Assuming that you decide to pay them off with a lump sum payment part way through, then I reckon what happens is they refund you part of the PPI premium, which is what I think happened with my loan. Although on the Egg website my loan account showed £12-13k to pay back, they deducted the remaining PPI premium and I ended paying back around £10k I think.

 

Hopefully dx or someone else more experienced than me will be able to confirm whether my reasoning is based on fact or fiction!!

 

Good luck with your claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did settle the loan early, but my understanding of the reduced amount being payable at that time was to take account of the interest which had been added at the start of the loan and that this interest obviously ceases to be payable on early settlement of the loan. Lenders initially calculate your loan repayments on the assumption that you pay the interest right to the end of the loan so this reduces the settlement figure once the interest is recalculated. Does anyone else agree with this? I may send a SAR today anyway to hurry things along a bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

pointless to speculated without the info

 

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...