Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice is change. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been reading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. On mediation form you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee that you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.  
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
    • too true HB, but those two I referred for starters - appear to be self admitted - One to excuse other lockdown law breaking, by claiming his estate away from his consistency and London abode was his main home the other if he claims to have 'not told the truth' in his own words via that quote - to have mislead his investors rather than broken lobbying rules   - seem to be slam dunks - pick which was your law breaking - it seems to be both and much more besides in Jenricks case Starmer was director of public prosecutions yet the tories are using seemingly baseless allegations for propaganda and starmer is missing pressing apparent blatant criminality in politics
    • I am sure the resident experts will give you a comprehensive guide to your rights.  The responsibility lies with the retailer. I have dealt with Cotswold before for similar. And found them refreshingly helpful.   Even when I lost the receipt for one item I had bought in Inverness. The manager in Newcastle called the store. Found the transaction and gave me a full refund. 
  • 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
      • 160 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3872 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

5 years ago was called into branch and was talked into converting my credit card balance

which was at the time £9,800 into a bank loan,

 

at that time i was classed as self employed and 63 years old without saying a single word about ppi

they tried to sneak it in ,

i spotted it the next day and duly cancelled the ppi

 

out of the blue i get a letter telling me that i would not get all the benefits on offer with ppi on my 65th birthday relating to my credit card

which i had been talked into converting to a bank loan,

 

i had been paying ppi for over 10 years on the card without knowing i had it,

 

to cut a long story short i put a claim in for this missold ppi on my credit card

 

they have done nothing but lie and used delaying tactics since

 

at last they admit it was misold and they say they sent a letter out on the 18th march

 

still not got it despite at least 6 calls to the help line

 

am being ignored by all i speak to and send emails to

 

managed at last to get the man on the help line to dictate this letter over the phone

 

was told that they had put 173 pounds into my account as due to the passage of time they have no record of this credit card

and they consider this to be a fair offer

 

still not had this in writing but told him over the phone where he could stick his offer am still awaiting anything in writing where do i go from here

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

you need to sar them.

 

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 weeks later...

five years ago the bank converted my credit card of £9,800 into a bank loan

 

,i later found out that the card had ppi on it for over nine years before converting it into a bank loan 5 years ago,

 

have put claim in it has been upheld but they say due to the passage of time they have no record of this card

and it is up to me to prove otherwise and have offered £173 after paying for over 9 years,

 

have sent off sar request no reply as yet.

 

it was them 5 years ago who arranged this bank loan and they are trying to say they know nothing about it

who is the onus of proof on any help please what to do

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would await the SAR and see what it shows.

 

Even of there are one or two statements that show PPI on it then it will put you in a stronger position to put pressure on them.

 

Lloyds are currently one of the worst to deal with I'm afraid so you may have a fight on your hands with this one but take it a step at a time and you may get a good result.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

five years ago the bank talked me into converting my £9,770 credit card debt into a loan,i find out on my 65th birthday via a letter from the bank that i no longer quilified for certain aspects of ppi insurance on the credit card---never knew i had ppi on it so i banged in a claim which they upheld and offered £173 to cover for over ten years on the basis that due the passage of time they have no records such as what the balance was or when it was cleared,the lying cheating so and soes it was they who arranged for the credit card via a loan to be cleared .after a number of letters going to and fro they still maintain that is a fair offer and go on to say that they are only allowed in law to keep records for seven years,correct me if i am wrog but surely that means they do have records for the last 2 years of my credit card,simple maths it is now 20013 minus 7 =2006 credit card converted to a loan 2008 which clearly shows they are bull****ting,am waiting for a sar request they have to the end of the month to comply where do i go from here,they are blatently no telling the truth but i am banging my head off a brick wall,£173 for over 10 years is a insult

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it were me I would await the SAR to see what turns up.

 

Banks try to hide behind this six (in your case seven) year business but we do know that they hold data beyond this time and sometimes, when threatened with court action to force the disclosure of personal data, they suddenly find more information.

 

When did you take the card out?

 

If they really don't have the data you may be able to press them to give you redress based on an average of premiums going back to the start of the card but it will involve pressing them and maybe get fos involved.

 

As I say, I would see what turns up with the SAR first.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes i got a few of them along with the credit card agreement dating back to 2000,it clearly shows that i ticked the box for no ppi,it just shows what a bunch this bank is you tick the box for no ppi and then they put it in behind your back then they do not show it on your statements but i found a internal bank papers that show they were charging me each month for it,i think that is why even after i sent the sar request to the correct address that they are now saying after all this time it is a different dept for ppi,as far as i am concerned this ammounts to fraud,if vi walked into the bank on a monthly basis and took money out of the till i know what would happen yet they have been taking money out of mine WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE.

Edited by ims21
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, if you have card statements the PPI would feature as a distinct item on there as a monthly payment.

 

If it does not show on the monthly statements then in reality it is unlikely that PPI has been applied to the card account.

 

It could well be that it was applied to the loan though and if this is the case it will be shown on the loan agreement.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i did not take loan out until 2008 and yes they tried to sneak ppi in on that as well but i spotted it and stopped it straight away the ppi was on the card that i paid off with the loan,so i had been unaware that i had been payiny ppi from 2000 until 2008 i even got a letter on my 65th birthday to say that certain aspects of the ppi on the card were no longer covered. they admit it was misold but the offer of 173 pounds for those 8 years is a insult and no there is no mention on the few credit card statements they have sent about ppi but on there own internal data which i think they have sent by mistake it clearly shows the amount of ppi charged each moth relating to the credit card,what should i do next there is something very dodgy here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the PPI doesn't show on the few statements you have because there was no balance to protect in those months.

 

What I would do is write to them and demand that they give you a detailed breakdown of their offer and also question them as to why they haven't taken into account the full period of the card.

 

If they claim that they do not have records going that far back then you should insist that they use an average to work back to the beginning of the account.

 

If they still fail to come up with a reasonable offer then ask fos to look into it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

have had time now to read more carefully,and after ringing the sar people up,who were helpful and very nice people to talk to have discovered on old statements going back to 2000 10 of those old type a4 statements ppi payments on those,but it then gets confusing as the cards change from trustcard then asset gold and then platinum and no ppi payments appear yet years later i get a letter from the bank on my 65th birthday that the unemployment cover no longer existsts but hospitalition cover does. to add to the mystery on a section of the paperwork they sent it claims i opened a classic account back in 1957,i do not think so i was only eleven years old then,and then a cca agreement which differs from my account in as much that the cca refers to a asset gold card but it clearly shows on my account history that it was a platinum card they are unable to find any other cca agreements,it may be hard to beleive but i suspect that my account has been doctored in some way as i rember taking out this platinum card back in 2000 but it does not appear on my statements until late 2007 how can this be ,what the hell is going on

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to make a claim then you will have to have evidence of the payments at least. If your claim is based on the fact that you would never have qualified for a payout in the first place because you were self-employed or you had an existing medical condition - then the lack of agreement shouldn't be a problem. Your record of payments should be enough to show that PPI was in force

Link to post
Share on other sites

how old are these agreements missing?

 

how have you found out the bank don't have them?

 

by SAR return?

 

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

it is a brain teaser this one,the bank claim they have no idea when the card started or was paid off,but sar documents have shown 10 statements dating from 2000 which ppi was paid and then suddenly stpped,then years later i get a letter telling me now that i am 65 i am not covered for the unemployment section of the ppi,for a card number they claim they cannot find,to add to the mystery the only cca they could find clearly showsa a tick in the box for no ppi,so what card does the 10 statements relate to and the letter in 2011 about my 65th birthday and ppi they have admitted miselling it is the offer what is in dispute and how they arrive at it

Link to post
Share on other sites

i posted 3 new posts on this sight for some reason they did not appear anywhere ,then today was looking for ppi solicitors and filling my details in ,name tel number email address away from this sight and low and behold up popped the headers for the 3 posts i had attempted to put on consumer forums,anybody got any ideas as to what happened

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, no idea - but why do you want to share your money with PPI solicitors when you can keep it all for yourself?

Link to post
Share on other sites

it is a bit complex in the sense that it has got to the stage that as a result of sar information it looks as though my data has been doctored and i need expert advice and on top of that there has without a doubt been gross miscoduct by one or more bank staff regarding my account

Link to post
Share on other sites

PPI companies wont give you "expert advice". They definitley wont do anything about Gross misconduct by bank staff or forged info in a sar. ALl they will say is "sorry, we cant process your claim".

  • Confused 1

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...