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 
        • 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 mis-sold over 20 years ago. Lloyds deny ever taken out. Claim rejected. Help!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3156 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

Good Morning All,

My dad took out a couple of loans and credit cards in the early 1990s with TSB (Later part of Lloyds).

 

 

He was advised at the time that he could not take out the products unless he also took out PPI.

 

 

He did not need the PPI as at the time he had a very good job

which had an excellent sick pay/redundancy policy.

 

 

He recently tried to claim this PPI back through a claim company.

The claim company were eventually sent a Data Subject Access Request

showing basic details of the accounts my Dad held with the TSB.

 

 

Lloyds (TSB) claim that my Dad did not have PPI on any of the loans or credit cards.

He knows that he did but has no way of proving otherwise.

 

 

The Loans and CCs were taken out so long ago he has no proof.

The claim company have since sent him a letter along with a copy of the DSAR

stating that they have rescinded their contract with him.

 

 

My first question is this,

 

 

where does my dad go from here.

He knows he was mis-sold PPI but has no way of proving this.

 

 

Secondly, If there is a way of proceeding and he was successful in his claim,

can the Claim company demand any of this money from him?

 

 

Thank you so very much to anyone that takes the time to respond to this post.

 

 

My Dad and I will be most grateful for any advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no the claims company contract is now closed.

 

 

why don't you send an sar

to both Lloyds

and

tSB

 

 

the info will be around somewhere

we know they have details going back too well into the 90's

 

 

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

Thank you very much for your reply dx.

 

will this not just result in them sending the same thing to my Dad again?

 

 

The letter he received from the claim company included a copy of what they called a 'Data Subject Access Response' from Lloyds.

 

 

It consisted of an excel spreadsheet giving only reference numbers, my Dads name, his present postcode,

a column for the type of product and a column saying 'No PPI' to which they have entered No to all of them.

 

 

Sorry to sound ignorant.

 

 

Dad asked me to help and I have never done this before so haven't a clue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

when the fleecing CMC sent their letter

it was obv that they wanted info on PPI

 

you send a new SAR

 

stating you want ALL the info they hold for his personal records.

 

this is one of the reasons why recommend never to use a CMC

 

in a way Lloyds have done you a favour

 

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...