Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks for posting the CPR contents. i do wish you hadn't blanked out the dates and times since at times they can be relevant . Can you please repost including times and dates. They say that they sent a copy of  the original  PCN that they sent to the Hirer  along with your hire agreement documents. Did you receive them and if so can you please upload the original PCN without erasing dates and times. If they did include  all the paperwork they said, then that PCN is pretty near compliant except for their error with the discount time. In the Act it isn't actually specified but to offer a discount for 14 days from the OFFENCE is a joke. the offence occurred probably a couple of months prior to you receiving your Notice to Hirer.  Also the words in parentheses n the Act have been missed off. Section 14 [5][c] (c)warn the hirer that if, after the period of 21 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to hirer is given, the amount of unpaid parking charges referred to in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)(f) or 9(2)(f) (as the case may be) has not been paid in full, the creditor will (if any applicable requirements are met) have the right to recover from the hirer so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Though it states "if any applicable ...." as opposed to "if all applicable......" in Section 8 or 9. Maybe the Site could explain what the difference between the two terms mean if there is a difference. Also on your claim form they keeper referring to you as the driver or the keeper.  You are the Hirer and only the Hirer is responsible for the charge EVEN IF THEY WEREN'T THE DRIVER. So they cannot pursue the driver and nowhere in the Hirer section of the Act is the hirer ever named as the keeper so NPC are pursuing the wrong person.  
    • This is simply a scam site.  It's been shown to be a scam in the national press and on national TV. Please fill in the the forum sticky and upload the invoice you've received. In fact what you have is an invoice, not a fine, a private company doesn't have the power to issue fines.  
    • Moved to the Private Parking forum.
    • Good afternoon, I am writing because I am very frustrated. I received a parking fine from MET Parking Services Ltd , ( Southgate park Stansted CM24 1PY) . We stopped for a quick meal in Mcdonalds and were there fir around 30 mins. We always do this after flights and never received a parking fine before.  Reason: The vehicle left in Southgate car park without payment made for parking and the occupants southgate premises. they took some pictures of us leaving the car. i did not try and appeal it yet as I came across many forums that this is a scam and I should leave it. But I keep getting threatening letters.  Incident happened : 23/10/2023 I did contact Mcdonalds and they said this:  Joylyn (McDonald’s Customer Services) 5 Apr 2024, 12:05 BST Dear Laura, Thank you for contacting McDonald’s Customer Services. I’m sorry to hear that you have received a Parking Charge Notice following your visit to our Stansted restaurant.   We've introduced parking restrictions at some of our restaurants to make sure there are always parking spaces available for customers.   We appreciate that some visits such as birthday parties or large group visits might take longer and the parking restrictions aren't intended to stop this. If you think your stay will exceed the stated maximum parking time then please speak to a manager in advance.   Your number plate is scanned by our Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) system when you enter our car park, and then again when you leave. If you have overstayed the maximum time allowed, you will not be notified straight away- a Parking Charge Notice will be sent to you via the post.   If you feel that a Parking Charge Notice has been issued in error, please contact our approved contractors who issued the charge in order to appeal the charge. Unfortunately McDonald's are unable to revoke parking tickets- the outcome of the appeal is final and cannot be overturned by McDonald’s.   Many thanks for taking the time to contact McDonald’s Customer Services.   Can someone please help me out and suggest what I should do next?  Thank you 
  • 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

Dual insurance nightmare


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6012 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

Two yrs ago I took out a new mortgage with a company called The mortgage works.

 

The broker that I used also got quotes for life / buildings & contents insurance for my new house,

which frankly i didnt need as i was able to increase the ones that i already had running.

 

I contacted the mortgage lender and told them this,

they were quite happy but explained that they would need to be a named interest on the policies.

I contacted the insureres and had their interest added & faxed the mortgage works this proof and thought that was an end to it!!

 

Wrong..

.in the first year of this new mortage the company failed to send us an end of year statement,

i contacted them only to be told that they had sent one, which i clearly had not received.

They would charge me £25 for the previdge of sendin another so i told them not to bother!

 

The next year I did receive the end of yr statement and low and behold they had been taking £35.00 per month

included in the mortgage payment for buildings & contents insurance.

 

I contacted them straight away and told them that this had been cancelled two yrs before.

 

They said that it had not and if i wanted it cancelled.

..yes you've guessed it they would charge me a £25 admin fee!

 

I refused to pay so they refused to cancel the policy, of course i had to back down.

 

Then came the problem of trying to claim back the premiums that they had been taking from me, in excess of £800.

Apparently this problem falls under 'dual insurance law', and my god have they run rings around me since November.

 

We have had every stalling question in the book,

what was the sum assured with the other company (Abbey) had we had any claims etc etc

each one of these by letter, and no two people in the whole company bothered to avail themselves of the problem.

This has meant me having to explain every time i ring them.

 

It is now April & I have still not received as much as an apology from them.

 

Apparently dual insurance law means that both insurers involved have to cough up 50% of any refund due.

This seems very odd to me as Abbey had done nothing wrong.

 

However I have learned today from Abbey that because we had a 'claim' on a garden wall back last June,

which in fact was not covered by the policy and we could not claim.

 

They still classify this as a claim, despite the fact that they did nothing except send out an assesor who said it wasnt covered!

 

This means that they do not have to give us back 50% of the total that we have dually paid,

so instead of receiving 50% of 24 months worth of premiums we are now only entitled to 50% of 4 months!!

Whats the betting that the mortage works will say the same??

 

So I am £800 out of pocket through no fault of my own,

and i still have a broken garden wall that cannot be claimed for on either policy!!

How in gods name can these companys get away with treating people like this, any ideas...I'm open to anything!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Rowan600,

 

Have you spoken to someone in authority at the mortgage works?

 

Do you have the original fax or letter stillon your PC, names of the people you have spoken to, the dates, advise given and all written correspondence?

 

If you have most of this, you should contact the CEO and demand the refund as it is their mistake.

 

If you are unsure how to word such a letter, I caould help you and get the names of people in the mortgage works to write to.

 

LOULA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi!

 

More to follow after the kids bath, but you may want to quote this in your letter from TMW's website...

 

Commitment to Service

We are strongly committed to the highest quality customer service. As part of this commitment we have established strict standards of service aimed at providing you with:-

 

1 Excellent service;

 

2 Efficient administration of your account;

 

3 A personal and courteous response to your enquiries;

 

4 Absolute confidentiality.

 

Be back on line about 8 with your info

 

LOULA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Evening,

 

Write to Matthew Wyles (have met him a couple of times and always found to be quite straight forward). He is the Group Development Officer at Portman Building Society and one of the Directors of the whole Group so covers the Mortgage Works as well. He is an ex Insurance person so knows the lie of the land.

 

As regards the Insurance Ombudsman, I suggest you write to Matthew first then if nothing satisfactory happens, follow this link, fill out the form and send it off.

 

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/consumer/complaints.htm#3

 

Good luck, if you need any further help you know where to find me

 

LOULA

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Yes result!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I did as you suggested and constructed a very long and detailed account of this nightmare!

 

I have today received a cheque for total settlement of all the premiums that Mortgage Works have taken in error, they are not admitting that they are at fault of course but who cares,:) they couhged up, all i ever wanted was my money back, thank you heeps to all the moderators that advised me

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

I too have a dual insurance nightmare

... two years ago this month (November 2005) I took out a small mortgage with the Halifax, they offered me insurance, and I said no, I was happy with my insurer (Zurich).

 

Unbeknownst to me,

they took out insurance anyway on my behalf,

for buildings and contents with accidental damage,

about which I knew nothing until I received a renewal notice this month for the first time

- I received no renewal last November, whether through Halifax error or PO mess up, I can't say.

 

I sent the Halifax copies of my insurance with Zurich for 2005-2007, and have today received a letter which states that , as is 'normal practice' with such cases, they are providing me with a 50% refund which they will not credit to my bank account, but to my mortgage account.

 

I explained to the man that I spoke to that I fail to see why the Zurich should have to reimburse me, as their insurance was what I had chosen, and I had in any case now switched my insurance to Cornhill, so why should the Zurich reimburse me for a Halifax error?

 

 

In any case, the Halifax insurance was more expensive, so I was not getting a full refund .

.. all I got was a lot of flannel from the smooth operator in Dual Insurance at the Halifax,

at which I said that I would put my complaints in writing to the management of the Halifax.

 

I don't see why I should only get half and no interest refunded for what is neither my error nor the Zurich's ...

 

Is the Halifax actually allowed to rip me off this way?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 11 years later...

This topic was closed on 03/08/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6012 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...