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

Partial success with Santander(ex Alliance and Liecester - miss sold overdraft)


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3970 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

Hello to everyone this is my first posting,

although I have used this forum as a resource.

 

Santander (ex Alliance and Leicester) have offered me a nice sum for miss sold overdraft cover, a version of PPI but only going back six years.

 

Although I have had an account there for at least twenty years!

Is this correct?

 

They state that they only hold six years statements (very convenient) and can go back no further,

I am sure I read somewhere that they can estimate the redress due even though no statements are available.

 

I might have one or two old statement in my shed but nowhere near over fourteen years worth…

 

Will I have to accept the very generous offer or can I push harder and get proper redress?

Link to post
Share on other sites

you they / should can guestimate

its on the fos site

 

hae you sar'd them

 

I don't believe them for one minute

they don't exist

 

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

I have turned my shed upside down and found a statement just 1 dated Dec 00, and it shows a direct debit for OD protection, this shows I was paying it in 2000.

I wonder if some of the wiser people on here could point me in the right direction re wording a letter saying "your a pack of lying ****" but in a nice legal way ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

you can't really complain until you have requested

the data legally & been refused.

 

however, you 'could' write back rejecting their off

and including your statement found

 

as 'an example' of the data you hold.

 

and then sar them by sep cover

 

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

While hunting for old bank statements I found a statement for an Alliance and Leicester (now Santander) account it was called Flexiplan and was a sort of rolling credit.I had forgotten all about this because it’s dated 20th Oct 2000, I have the account number, and was paying PPI on it.I have already had success claiming against Santander for my current account overdraft protection, is it worth pursuing and do I have enough with one statement to claim for PPI on this account, as it was so long ago, will they scream it’s over 6 years so we have no records???

Edited by pa38
Wrong year in title
Link to post
Share on other sites

Always worth a go in my opinion.

 

They may indeed throw up the 6 year bit and if the account was closed more than 6 years ago then they may be telling the truth.

 

Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I was made an offer in April by Santander of £1,200 on my overdraft cover, Santander stated that was for the last six years as they had no records beyond six years.

They stated that if I had any statements beyond six years they would look at my claim again.

Unfortunately for them I found several dating back to 1999, that showed cover payments and sent them off (copies).

I am still waiting for a response, do I allow 8 weeks for the re-investigation or do I keep the pressure on ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep the pressure on.

 

They know very well that they have records beyond six years but are trying to minimise their cash payouts.

 

If they claim not to have these records then you should tell them that you want your award worked out on an average payment for the missing months/years.

 

These people were all too quick to relieve their victims of money but will will do all they can to continue in their untrustworthy antics to frustrate claimants.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a specific of case law relating to an average payment,(how do I word the letter) and is it back to start of the account, its over 20 years.......

Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't a matter of case law but the regulators suggest that an average payment can be calculated where it is clear that premiums have been paid.

 

When you say you found "several" statements, how many are we talking and for what period of time?

 

Would you say that your overdraft amount remained fairly constant for the missing period?

 

Have you ever sent them a subject access request to get as much data from them as you can? If not, it might be worth it.

 

Doesn't matter about the 20 years...there is no time limit as such on PPI claims.

 

If you can provide the above information then we can help you with your letter and some calculations.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have added a copy of the letter I received from Santander, I have five statements ranging from April 99 to April 01 and on each payment to protection plan is £2.16 per month.I can’t remember when the premium started to be charged, but I am sure it was at the same time the account was opened in the mid 80’s.I haven’t sent a SAR because they claim several times they have no records beyond September 06.I wonder if someone more informed than me could give me an estimate of what to expect back, and could it be backdated beyond April 99?

Link to post
Share on other sites

O would write back to them saying that you are not satisfied as to the accuracy of their figures at the moment and that you want this looked at further in view of the copies of older statements you have provided.

 

Tell them that you do not believe them when they say they have no records further back than six years and you feel that they are attempting to frustrate a legitimate claim.

 

Tell them that you are quite prepared to involve fos in this matter in order that a fair outcome is achieved and not one that is biased towards towards the bank.

 

I notice they have come clean and offered a refund of overdraft fees etc. which is a step in the right direction.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply, I did write back it wiil be 8 weeks on the 21st of June, I included the copies of statements I had, and asked them to look at may claim again.Do they have to reply within 8 weeks as it is an ongoing complaint? As the account is still open and active I can't belive they have no recored any further back, if they don't how could they defend complaints without the original paperwork?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is an ongoing complaint but you need to keep the pressure on them.

 

Don't forget that the banks will do everything they can to avoid repaying people and if you expect fair treatment from a bank you need to adjust your thinking. :-)

 

We know and they know that they have data going back more than six years....there are many threads on here where old stuff has mysteriously been found when the banks are pressed.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...