Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

GE Money PPI refused by PPI claim handler.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3733 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,

I was on here some months ago (Jun '13) trying to make a PPI claim from a secured loan/mortgage taken out in 2002, £10k + £1.6k PPI with GE Money.

 

The account went into arrears in it's lifetime but last year it was paid off. So charge has been removed from Property.

 

GE Money refused our complaint, saying that Greenhill Finance introduced the loan.

 

Greenhill Finance response on 28/06/13 was that the mortgage was arranged with I group loans ltd.

They then go on to say the loan was pre 2005 so no FOS remit etc.

 

because I felt we had hit a brickwall I attempted to instruct Emcas to deal with it,

thinking that left to me we would get nothing so at least we had a chance of getting 60% back.

 

they refused because they said a payment plan was set up in the lifetime of the loan

and that therefore if they won any monies, GE money would retain it and we would be left with a fee for Emcas.

 

This doesn't ring right to me.

Why would GE money keep any money?

 

So I am thinking about instructing another PPE claim firm but need to clarify we wont end up out of pocket.

Many thanks.

S

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the loan is paid off and there is nothing due then any refund of PPI will come to you.

 

What do you think that a reclaim company can do that you can't?

 

If your decision letters were more than six months ago then you would be out of time to refer to fos anyway, even if they could take it on.

 

Di you check with fos that what you were being told was true?

 

Who actually sold you the PPI?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No I never did refer to FOS, never believed it would count - have I potentially jeopardised this claim?

 

igroup loans limited is at the top of the Credit Agreement and it was them that we believe sold the loan, not Greenhill Finance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It wouldn't hurt to give fos a call to see but as said, even if they could have taken it on you are possibly out of time. Have a chat with them and see.

 

Whilst I Group may be on the top of the agreement it is probably not them who sold the loan to you. Did you have a rep come to your home? Is there any mention of an agent on any of the paperwork you have?

 

If you believe it was Greenhill that sold you the PPI then it is they who you should go after.

 

What were the circumstances of your getting the loan. i.e. the process you went through.

 

By the way, IGroup are GE Money.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ref 6 month time scale I've just found this:

 

from http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/six-month-time-limit.htm

what if the "final response" does not mention the six-month time limit?

 

If the final response was issued after 1 December 2001 and does not mention the six-month time limit, then the limit does not apply, irrespective of whether or not the financial business wishes to object.

On the greenhill finance final letter is just says it's outside of the FOS remit.

On the GE money it says again that it falls outside the FOS jurisdiction. It does say however about complaining to Finance and Leasing Association within 6 months, which I never did. Infact I don't remember reading that otherwise I probably would have done. Anyway, it's outside of 6 months now.

 

 

 

? Is it worth a call to the FOS?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

 

If they refuse on either basis that the time limit is up or it was outside their remit anyway then it would seem that your only option would be to sue for your money back.

 

What are your reasons for believing there was a mis-sale?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Loan was taken out over the phone, nothing face to face, documents in post.

Igroup is at the top of credit agreement,

Greenhill Finance apparently introduced,

There is what looks like an application form with a logo TLC in the top right.

 

PPI application is on igroup paper with TLC written in the introducer box. So I guess i group sold the PPI.

 

Reasons we believe loan was missold (from complaint letter):

- I was led to believe that my application for credit would be rejected if I did not take out the insurance.

- The policy exclusions were not explained to me either before or at the time I took out the insurance. I was therefore unable to make an informed decision as to whether this insurance was appropriate for me.

- I now believe the insurance was unsuitable for me as I was suffering from depression at the time I took out the policy and was not made aware of the specific exclusion which relates to pre-existing medical conditions.

- It was not explained to me that the policy premium would be paid upfront as a single premium and would be added to my debt and attract interest.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I today spoke with the FOS.

 

They are unable to help. They checked their database and will only take on GE Money cases post January 2005. They referred me to the FLA, which I've probably left it too late for. I will give them a call tomorrow.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...