Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • now do you want help or just come here to rant at the 1st chance. is this indictive of why you have this issue with BG? there isn't one really just you being pedantic? now give us a chance to decide lets have some info. we don't accept .jpg picture files as they are displayed directly to screen whereby anyone members or not can see them, hence we require a multipage pdf properly redacted. theres a good upload guide to read on that. so ball is your court... we still would help our worst enemy regardless . dx
    • doh sorry was on phone screen. i think thats all ok,  let @AndyOrch confirm 1st please. dx  
    • Same date as poc then i dont like the agreement either, it just smells to me, but i can't find a like one of that era to compare against. this is only 10yrs old, so weight that up, i'd say enforceable & most are from the ear as a whole here. it cant be a recon as they must state so, and it wouldn't/doesn't need to have a tickbox+typed name to be so either. >80% loss if you go fwd, unless you can pay the CCJ within 30 days of judgement in FULL, might be time to consider a tomlin/consent, as much as i hate link, if you don't want to gamble on a very small chance of a win or can't pay within 30 days if you lose. what date is the hearing? dx    
    • Hi T911 and welcome to CAG. As you say, an interesting screw up. So much for quality control! Anyway, our regular advice is to ignore all of their increasingly threatening missives... UNLESS you get a letter of claim, then come back here and we'll help you write a "snotty letter" to help them decide whether to take it any further with their stoopid pics. If you get mail you're unsure of, just upload it for the team to have a look.
    • Thanks @lolerzthat's an extremely helpful post. There is no mention of a permit scheme in the lease and likewise, no variation was made to bring this system in. I recall seeing something like a quiet enjoyment clause, but will need to re-read it and confirm. VERY interesting point on the 1987 Act. There hasn't been an AGM in years and I've tried to get one to start to no avail. However, I'll aim to find out more about how the PPC was brought in and revert. Can I test with you and others on the logic of not parking for a few months? I'm ready to fight OPS, so if they go nuclear on me then surely it doesn't matter? I assume that I will keep getting PCNs as long as I live here, so it doesn't make sense for me to change the way that I park?  Unless... You are suggesting that having 5 or so outstanding PCNs, will negatively affect any court case e.g. through bad optics? Or are we trying to force their hand to go to court with only 2 outstanding PCNs?
  • 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

Need Help and Advice on PPI


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4093 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 everyone,

 

I'm new on here and would really appreciate some help and advice on claiming back some PPI from Natwest/RBS.

 

I phoned Natwest's PPI number 8 weeks ago to check if any of my old accounts with them had PPI attached to it.

 

I was told that one of the accounts which was closed down in 2005 had PPI attached to the overdraft and a 2nd account had PPI on a £3000 loan in 1995/1996.

 

I got a letter from them that the accounts are being investigated and that they'll get back to me by 8weeks.

 

Yesterday, 7.5 weeks after I put in my claim I received a letter from Natwest saying they've investigated and there was no PPI attached to the overdraft account.

 

I found this strange since that's not what I was told on the phone whem I first contacted them.

 

I decided to ring them back yesterday and the lady I spoke to said there was PPI showing on it,

that the reason why the investigation says there was no PPI on it is because it was cancelled.

 

Now I'm confused, if it was cancelled surely their system should say that!

How can there be two conflicting information on one account?

 

I also asked the lady recheck the loan account and this time she said there was two loans for £3000, one in 1995 and the other in 1996.

They only ever told me of one loan before.

So this is waht I think, they either don't know what they're doing or they are trying everything to avoid refunding the PPI they charged me.

 

Well this morning I get another letter from Natwest offering me £614 for PP1 paid on the loan account(singular reference).

 

I was actually expecting a higher figure since the loans go back 18 years.

 

I don't have any old records or statements for the 2 accounts I'm claining on so I have no documents to proof yea or nay.

 

So here are my questions :

 

Should I turn down the £614 offer,

I think its rather low for 18yrs of them keeping my money or am I being too greedy?

I'm no good with numbers so don't know what they should be paying.

 

Should I wait to clarify if PPI was applied to one or two £3000 loans in 1995 and 1996?

If I accept the £614 can I still have them investigate the 2 separate loans.

 

Should I just for the SAR,

I'm on jobseekers at the moment and won't have the £10 for the SAR application till next week.

I'm worried about how long the whole thing will take if I go this route, I'm so broke right now.

 

Should I contact the Ombudsman regarding the conflicting info on the overdraft account?

 

I'm so sorry that this has turned out to be a right novel,

just didn't know how else to explain things so that you'll get my point.

I'll really appreciate your assistance thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread moved to the PPI forum.

 

First off, write to the lender and require them to provide you with a detailed breakdown of the offer. Tell them that you are not in a position to either accept or reject as they have not provided any workings on how their offer is calculated.

 

Also SAR the lender to get as much detail as you can on the accounts you held with them. There is a template for SAR in the CAG library, the link to which is at the top of every CAG page in green. Amend it to suit. The cost is £10 and they will have 40 days to comply. Make sure you add a line that it is to include copies of all and any agreements you have ever had with them.

 

If it has to wait a week or so before you can SAR them then so be it. Best to make sure their offer is correct otherwise you stand a very good chance of being stiffed by the bank again.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

SAR them.

 

no otherway

 

then we can do a spreadsheet

 

and no

 

£600 is NOT CORRECT for an 18yrs PPI reclaim!!!

 

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

Thanks for the advice, I did think my desperation was colouring my thinking, what you said makes a whole load of sense. Will write the letter and and pay for the SAR next week. Out of curiosity, how long on average does it take for the report to come through?.

Link to post
Share on other sites

40 cal days

 

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

Thanks will wait for the SARS, If I can get more money that's worth fighting for.

I was just wondering, what sort of amount would one expect get back on a £3000 loan from 1996 that was paid back in 3 years?

 

Depends on the amount of the premium. It would have been a single premium, front loaded and paid for over the life of the loan.

 

Without the figures we can't tell, hence the need for SAR and their detailed breakdown.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, guess I'll just have to wait for the SAR.

In the meantime I'm writing 2 letters to RBS, asking for a detailed breakdown of how they arrived at their offer figure and to explain why on the phone to tell me there was PPI attached to my overdraft and in saying the opposite in their letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41488[/ATTACH]

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

Hi guys,

 

Just wanted to update you on what I've been up to.

I've sent Natwest a letter asking for a detailed breakdown of how they arrived at the £614 offer and also applied for SAR.

Both letters were sent recorded do they can't claim they never got them.

Now to wait for their response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

great

 

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...