Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • In short you never communicate with a Debt Collector, they have no power here at all. The snotty letter is only used to respond to a properly worded Letter Before Claim. The only time you would be recommended to contact the PPC is to send the snotty letter. You do nothing but keep the tripe they send you unless you receive a letter before claim.
    • Probably to do with the Creditor accepting the reduced payments claim as part of the IVA. - Thats my guess anyway.  As for the mount outstanding... 60k is incredible and im pretty sure a DRO wouldnt cover that much even after the new legislation.    For you @Alfy - Please stay headstrong and stop worrying. My viewpoint on debt with debt collectors is simple. You are a figure on a spreadsheet loaded into a database for them to run a collection cycle through.  They dont care about emotions or your situation, they just care about paying off their shareholders and trying to turn a profit.  They use varying tactics to increase the pressure on you to the point where you will break. People then fall for this an either cave in to DCAs before doing their own due diligence on the debts that are purchased or turn to IVAs like you have.    They are better ways to handle this and Im glad you feel better after a good nights sleep - I hope you can keep it up. 
    • Good afternoon,    I am writing in reference to the retail dispute number ****, between myself and Newton Autos concerning the sale of a Toyota Avensis which has been found to have serious mechanical faults.    As explained previously the car was found to be faulty just six days after purchase. The car had numerous fault codes that appeared on the dash board and went into limp mode. This required assistance from the AA and this evidence has already been provided. The car continues to exhibit these faults and has been diagnosed as having faults with the fuel injectors which will require major mechanical investigation and repairs.    Newton Autos did not make me aware of any faults upon purchase of the vehicle and sold it as being in good condition.    Newton Autos have also refused to honour their responsibilities under The Consumer Rights Act 2015 which requires them to refund the customer if the goods are found to be faulty and not fit for purpose within 30 days of purchase.    Newton Autos also refused to accept my rejection of the vehicle and refused to refund the car and accept the return of the vehicle.    It is clear to me that the car is not fit for purpose as these mechanical faults occurred so soon after purchase and have been shown to be present by both the AA and an independent mechanic.   Kind regards
    • Commercial Landlords are legally allowed to sue for early cancellation of the lease. You can only surrender your lease if your landlord agrees to your doing so. They are under no obligation even to consider your request and are entitled to refuse. You cannot use this as an excuse not to pay your rent. Your landlord is most likely to agree to your surrendering the lease if they want the property back in order to redevelop it, or if they wants to rent it to what they regards as a better tenant or at a higher rent. There are two types of surrender: Express surrender in writing. This is a written document which sets out the terms of the surrender. Implied surrender by conduct. (applies to your position) You can move out of the property you leased, simply hand your keys back and the lease will come to an end, but only if the landlord agrees to accept your surrender. Many tenants have thought they can simply post the keys through the landlord's letter box and the lease is ended. This is not true and without a document from the landlord, not only do you not know if the landlord has accepted the surrender, you also do not know on what basis they have accepted and could find they sue you for rent arrears, service charge arrears, damage to the property and compensation for your attempt to leave the property without the landlord's agreement. Unless you are absolutely certain that the landlord is agreeable to your departure, you should not attempt to imply a surrender by relying on your and the landlord's conduct.  
  • 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

Car Insurance claim after 2 months?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3838 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 and all, I have not posted for a while but I have a bit of a dilemma with the following

 

About 2 months ago I was on my way to work ( My partner was with me in the car )

And I went in to the back of a car ( barely ) as it slammed on

I was furious and pointed for the driver to pull in, she did

Before I could give the driver a piece of my mind I then realised it was a young girl who worked at the same place as me

I simply asked are you OK she replied yes, that was the end of it I thought

we both continued to drive to work, and I never heard another thing UNTIL TODAY

She is no longer employed at my place of work and I have now recieved an E-Mail from my insurance company

stating a claim has been bade against me and asking for details etc etc etc

there was no damage to her car as I barely touched it

she had a passenger with her, and as stated I had a passenger with me

where do I stand on this one? she is just looking for a free holiday clearly

my blood is boiling regarding this, any advice will be greatly received

Link to post
Share on other sites

All you can do is tell the truth.

 

Validate the claim with your insurers and tell them it was a low speed impact, that there was no damage apparent at the scene (if you took photos at the time it would be handy), and there were no apparent injuries at the scene. Advise that you worked with the third party and she never requested your insurance details from you directly.

 

I would query with your insurers what the third party's claim is for - e.g. vehicle damage, hire, personal injury etc

 

I presume you won't be disputing liability for the accident.

Link to post
Share on other sites

B*gger all you can do about this, apart from advise your Insurers what happened and let them deal with it. I suspect it will be a personal injury claim. Perhaps she now needs the money, which is making her neck feel a bit sore !

 

You will probably end up with a fault claim on your policy, as your Insurers are very likely to pay out to the third party.

 

Really annoying, but jumping up and down complaining about it, is unlikely to make any difference. Your Insurers will have processes in place to examine the third parties claim, as closely as they can. but they don't reject claims very often, unless they are certain it is bogus.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I will just say she reversed in to me

 

You'll open up a whole can of worms which you don't really want squirming around in your lap.

 

Look at it this way. If your insurance company contest the claim on that basis (highly unlikely) then they'll probably try and settle 50/50 first of all. If that doesn't work and they don't concede full liability (which they probably will do) then it may eventually end up in court where you will be asked to give evidence under oath that that's what happened.

 

She'll be adamant that you drove into her and that she didn't reverse in the middle, and a judge is likely to believe strong witness testimony as I found to my detriment yesterday!

 

So after all that a judge is likely to decide on the balance of probabilities (i.e. he has to be 51% or more sure after hearing the evidence) that she wouldn't have just reversed into you as you claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just been to the area of the accident and only just noticed that there is Two lanes at the junction of the mini roundabout, she was in the right lane I was in the left ( behind a car ) she has clearly cut across in to my lane ( The left lane ) as she wanted to go left, also she claims the incidint took place at 945pm when it was actually 1050 pm, I am sure she had been drinking to be honest, yes I went in to the back of her but am I still to blame?

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO its a 50/50 claim. You are both to blame. Especially given your arguments on this thread.

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

Can I just add further, today I received an E-Mail from Armour Intelligence Ltd, acting on behalf of Octagon Insurance, which after Goggling TURN OUT TO BE

A company that specializes in the Detection and Deterrence of fraudulent activity, now I am really confused about this one :/ I think when I took out the policy I was unemployed but am now working

And I never told them but does this amount to Fraud? what a bloody mine field this is becoming :/ any advice further?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi SuperVillain - The Email said as follows

 

"Dear Mr ****,

 

 

 

I am writing to you from Armour Intelligence Ltd, on behalf of Octagon Insurance, the current insurer of your BMW 330, VRN: ******.

 

 

 

We are trying to contact you so that we can ascertain the circumstances surrounding the traffic incident which occurred at 2145hrs on 31 August 2013 in *****.

 

Octagon has received a claim from a third party regarding the above incident, and has a legal responsibility to respond to any claim made regarding an insured person. Therefore need to speak to you regarding the incident before any formal response is made.

 

 

 

Could you please either respond to this email, call or text me on XXXXXXX so that we can commence the required paperwork.

 

 

 

Your urgent attention to this matter is greatly appreciated,

 

Not a nasty letter but still is this common place

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty standard. Octagon are quite a small company who operate from offices near Bristol. Because of the size of their operation, they will outsource much of their work. Because this accident claim has been made a couple of months after the incident and probably includes personal injuries, I would think Octagon have major suspicions it is fraudulent.

 

You have nothing to worry about. It is just a case of providing information as accurate as you can.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I just had a conversation with the lovely woman at Armour Intelligence who informed me that, they are not claiming for any damage to her car, nor is the driver claiming anything

Only The passenger is claiming whiplash ( strange ) I suspect the reason the driver is not claiming whiplash is because she has probably had a recent claim for whiplash

it does strike me as very odd, my girlfriend was in the car with me who is pregnant and both her and I received no whiplash, I got the feeling that the lady from Amour Intelligence did not believe her story, I still can't see how I can be to blame for me rear ending her car because she left her designated lane in to mine without indicating at 1050 pm at night.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...