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

Barclaycard PPI redress


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2810 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

Thank you for your reply

 

 

however as i said the FOS will not accept on a Credit Card any PPI refund calculated with compound interest.

 

I had two recent credit card PPI claims and compound interest as calculated with your template forms were rejected by the FOS.

 

After rejections by two FOS Adjudicators

i passed one over to an FOS Ombudsman and again he rejected any compound interest redress.

 

Despite my protests that Barclaycard compound PPI premiums

the FOS Ombudsman did not agree and accepted the Barclaycard calculations were correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

posts from another thread moved to your existing thread.

 

 

the issue here is that by persisting in using the CISHEET,

it probably does not take into account the actual balance of the card each time PPI is levied.

 

 

this I why we suggested in post 4 you try the FOSrunning sheet.

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

And on another PPI credit card claim i have received another explanation from a different FOS Adjudicator as follows :

 

Quote '' I can see you have sent though a calculation for the interest charged due to the PPI.

 

As I have explained the additional interest added to your card because of the PPI will not be charged on a daily rate.

 

Your calculations show the interest rate charged in each month as a result of the PPI.

Therefore the interest should be worked out on the amount of the PPI in the balance for each particular month.

 

As an example in March 2000 the balance of your account was £1,188.02.

The interest charged on your balance was £17.95.

Your PPI charge was £7.91

we would expect the refund od associated interest to be proportional to the amount that was caused by the £7.91 PPI charge '' Unquote

 

 

something has to be wrong with your data somewhere

or something else is wrong..

 

 

the above is from post 16 in feb 2016...

 

 

I've never known the fosrunning to be wrong by very much in all the years we've used it.

 

 

dx

 

 

 

 

 

 

this is the first time I've heard of the fosrunning

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...