Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Wait for more replies, but that letter to me can be interpreted as a letter before action. Ignoring it can have consequences. The court to impose sanctions for failure in responding to a letter of claim.
    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Adrian Flux - THIS CAN'T BE RIGHT


DarrenTeesside
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4067 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 each & all

 

I have not posted for a while, so hopefully I can be informed whether I am right or Adrian Flux is right, I recently took out some Car insurance online via one of those compare websites

 

 

For a new car that I had to pick up ( 300 miles away ) all the details I gave them were correct and I got a very reasonable quote, I do two jobs and got a quote for both, as you do trying to find the cheapest Policy, I paid the insurance in full there and then via Credit Card and I got a policy number through my E-Mail ( NO DOCUMENTS THROUGH THE POST )

 

 

I picked the car up, drove it back the next day I get a call from them asking for me to ring them as they have a few queries, I rung them and found there question's to be just way to personal, I think the even wanted my DNA structure, I was not happy with this at all as I have never ever been asked such personal unrelated questions just to insure my car, I then get a letter stating that they won't insure me down to "Unacceptable Occupation"

 

 

I am a Plumber/Security Guard, and they canceled the policy on this basis

I telephoned them as they had not refunded my money and was informed a letter had gone out that I had to sign and return relating to the policy that never existed as it never got past there underwriters, then the cherry on the cake, they claim there is a set up/ cancellation fee of £30.00, now I don't get this, how can they charge me a set up fee when it never got past the underwriter, and a cancellation fee when they canceled the policy not me?

am I right or wrong here?

 

my Credit Card company claims they have looked in to it and there is a fee for cancellation's but surely this applies to if I cancel not them? am I right or wrong in thinking they are trying to have my pants down :/

Edited by citizenB
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have said that they are taking the mickey, although others will almost certainly be able to advise you on this.

 

I will flag for others to see.

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am Both a Security Guard & A Doorman, as well as a Plumber.......

My main concern is how they appear to think they are correct in charging me a £30.00

Setup/Cancellation fee when the Policy was not set up as the underwriters did not underwrite

Nor did I cancel the Policy, I know it is only £30.00 but the principal of these greedy fat cat b*****ds taking £30.00 for nothing really gets me angry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they are going to say that you had the benefit of cover for at least 24 hours and that you were covered whilst you were driving the vehicle :(

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have the option for "Doorman" as a job title, they would typically expect you to enter "Nightclub" as the employers business, however if you had entered "Security company" a lot of companies would still refuse to quote as doormen are not popular with Insurers as I assume you knew before.

 

Was it the door work Adrian Flux refused the cover for?

 

Did they cancel the policy from a date after the policy started or did they void the policy from the start date?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There letter states

 

"DECLARATION OF POLICY VOIDANCE

Motor Insurance Document No:- PMFET131628

Vehicle Registration No:- ********

Date Cover Ceased:- 06/02/2013 Unacceptable Occupation We regret to inform you that for the reason(s) stated above your insurance is being declared null and void from inception/renewal. In order for the Insurers to release a return of premium you must complete the following declaration. DECLARATION

Motor Insurance Document Number: PMFET131628

Vehicle Registration No: *******

I acknowledge that the above motor insurance document will cease to operate from 17:22 on the 06/02/2013. I acknowledge that it is an offence under the Road Traffic Act to keep, use or permit the use of my motor vehicle on a road or other public place unless alternative cover has been effected.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not easy to read but it seems to say they have declared the policy null and void from inception.

 

This would normally mean you have to declare you've had a policy voided for ever more for all insurance including home insurance.

 

I would suggest you contact them explain it was an honest mistake and ask them if they note the voidance on the central databases (Some companies won't not it).

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are two seperate issues here, the voiding of the policy and the "admin" fee.

 

Adrian Flux are a broker who specialise in non-mainstream risks and knowing the insurers that AF deal with I'm suprised that your occupation causes an issue. That said, the Insurer are within their rights to void the policy when thy know the full facts. I don't use or trust these comparison sites ( well, I use only as a guide ) for reasons like this. Forttuneately the vehicle registration would've been input on the MID immediately so no danger of you being pulled for no insurance.

 

They have declared the policy Null & Void from inception however should you have had an accident driving the vehicle back home and before you received thenotification then as RTA insurer, the insurer AF placed you with would be obliged to deal. Now the fact that they've stated the policy was voided as opposed to cancelled essentially means the policy wasn't in place so turning now to the admin fee, they should not be charging for something that's not been provided.

 

Your arguement with AF is that you provided your details in good faith and the "computer said yes" so you paid in good faith. The insurer found the occupation to be unacceptable but if that was the case, how did the aggregator site quote ? They cannot and should not be charging for this.

 

Give them this explaination & I'm sure you'll get your money back. If they still don't, I may have other ideas !

 

Out of curiosity, what questions were you asked ( obviously not the answer Lol ! ).

 

Let us know how you get on

 

Trojan

:p :p If my advice as been of help, please give me a quick click on the scales to your right ;) ;) :)
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...