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

Ppi reclaimed


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3463 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

Just to clarify what you should get back under the system of redress laid down by the regulators...

 

1-> All premiums paid

 

2->All contractual interestlink3.gif which arose as a result of those premiums

 

3->The account should be reconstructed with the above removed. If that reconstruction shows that in any month the account went into credit, you get 8% simple interest on that credit balance for that month.

 

4-> If the account is closed and paid off then there will be a difference between the actual amount paid and the reconstructed balance at that date. 8% simple is awarded on that difference running from the fate of the payment of the card balance up to the date of settlement of the claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

depends if there is an outstanding balance too

and if its been sold or not.

 

 

if the account is still owned by the Original creditor,

then the 'debt' must obviously contain a good proportion of the 'mis-sold ppi + interest.'

 

 

thus the debt is as such only 'notional', so the ppi reclaim will be used to abolish the notional debt

as the debtor has not actually paid the ppi etc they are thus reclaiming.

 

 

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

Hi dx100uk,could you expand ,or am i right in saying, if i had a credit card with say a £3000 pound balance and reclaimed ppi and interest on that card, that amounted to £5000 then do i recieve £2000 or the full £5000 and the card reverts to zero balance because the ppi and interest was rapped up in the original balance? very confusing?

 

splitenz

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the account is still with the original creditor then they are entitled to offset the PPI refund against the account balance. So in your example they can take £3,000 to clear the account and then refund the balance of £2,000 to you.

 

If the account has been sold on then no such right of set off exists and the full amount of refund (£5,000 in your example) should come to you.

 

There have been a few cases where the original creditor has bought the account back in order to carry out a set off.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...