Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What we need to see is all the original paperwork  That would include the pre contract information and the original HP Agreement  Post it up and I will have a good look over it at the weekend  It really hangs on the wording as to whether it’s a scrapage adjustment /discount on the price of the car( that is how some schemes worked) Every manufacturer had their own version  Have you sent VW a SAR?
    • Wrong as usual Jugg    Did Michael Cohen Commit Perjury In The Trump Trial? WWW.ZEROHEDGE.COM ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero Michael Cohen. He still has one day of cross examination ahead of him on Thursday. With the government resting after Cohen’s cross examination, I believe that an honest judge would have no alternative but to grant a motion for a directed verdict and end the case before it goes to the jury. Judge Juan Merchan will now have to give the full measure of his commitment to the rule of law. Given the failure to support the elements of any crime or even to establish the falsity of recording payments as legal expenses, this trial seemed to stumble through the motions of a trial. Michael Cohen was only the final proof of a raw political exercise. For critics, some of Cohen’s answers appear clearly false or misleading. Like their star witness, the prosecutors have shown that they simply do not take the law very seriously when there is an advantage to be taken.
    • So to sum up. 1.  You & your friend did the right thing on 28 December and are in the right legally. 2.  You are in the early stages of the threatening letter cycle.  We've seen these letters quite literally over 10,000 times.  For the moment your friend has nothing to worry about. 3.  No-one will turn up at your friend's door. 4.  If months down the line this got to court, you would win.  It's blatant disability discrimination.  Some time back I looked through the results of Excel v Caggers court cases, well we won 85% of the time, and you would be 100& certain to win. But this is the bit that you won't like ... 5.  Excel don't care that they are legally in the wrong.  They want your money.  They will go on and on with their letters hoping you'll give in. 6.  They are also the most litigious of the private parking companies and it's perfectly possible, months hence, that they will take your friend to court.  You have to be prepared for this.  They would lose.  But they don't care about the losses since, sadly, presumably so many people are afraid of court and so give in and pay.  7.  We will of course support you all the way!
    • Hi, Just updating that I'll be submitting the SJPN shortly this evening electronically.
  • 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

Welcome Finance SB debt


Dons2008
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3620 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

I have:

 

loan - 1500 in 2005

 

PPI - 993.40 (composed of 602.45 PPI, 390.95 int APR 45.9%)

 

He used the PPI amount and made a calculation as here:

 

stat 8

 

1500*1.1 = 1650

1650*1.1 = 1815 year 2

1815 * 1.1 = 1996.5 year 3

1996 * 1.1 = 2196 Year 4

2196 * 1.1 = 2415 Year 5

2415 *1.1 = 2637 year 6

2637 * 1.1 = 2923 Year 7

2923 * 1.1 = 3215 Year 8

 

Then, add the daily 8% from claim to court date.

 

Is this wrong, am I looking to receive more, or less?

 

@Brig - I'm holding that thought for a minute mate!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I indicated earlier to follow link 1 below

 

PPI is not compounded at their rate

 

neither is it calculated by the method detailed above

 

This first spreadsheet is the latest version of the statutory interestlink3.gif calculator and is used for Single Premium PPIlink3.gif cases. It can also be used where rollover PPI is involved, i.e. a new loan re-financing a previous one and where PPI is included in one or more loans. It can also be used for S69 redress calculation on any sum, like on a closed/frozen interest PENALTY charges claim.

 

StatIntSheet v101.xls

 

you need to know the date of each PPI payment

and enter it into the spread.

 

you also need to use the FOS questionnaire

 

NOT the welcome finance one

 

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

Cool, reading back, so you did. Thank you. I dont have statements, from memory I made 5 payments til default - June til the November I think it was. I remember it being right on top of Christmas.

 

Go for a SAR? I doubt they'd have any info, even.

 

Thank you :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Typically they should not be offsetting.

 

On the question of time to process your claim, take a note of point 10 in the link I gave you which states the usual 8 weeks to turnaround.

 

If nothing is heard after that time then start chasing.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

brilliant thank you.

 

So, to clarify - as my brain is fried with this (I don't know how you all deal with this day in day out btw!!)

 

I have to calculate PPI due to me by the amount of premiums paid, not the whole premium as added to the loan.. my hub & I were thinking take the loan amount then divide as per his working above.

I was thinking I calculated 8% of the 993.00 then added that to the 993.00.

 

What a wally.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ah well the secret is not to deal with it all day :lol:

 

Loan of £1500 and PPI of £602.45= Total Loan of £2,102.45.

 

Percentage of PPI to total loan is 602.45/ 2,102.45 x 100 = 28.65%

 

So 28.65% of each repayment you actually made was for the PPI.

 

So if your monthly repayment was, say £150 then the PPI part would be 28.65% of it which is £42.97.

 

No need to beat yourself up too much about the maths at the moment, the main thing is to get the claim in because the sooner you do that the sooner your claim will get looked at.

 

From other cases around the forum, the FSCS are usually correct with their figures.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

and if its on your cra file ,or just dropped off

they MUST legally still hold all the statements.

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...