Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi all! I've now had a "final notification letter" through from ECP. I assume I should continue to ignore this, but is there likely any action I need to take? Do you need to see a copy of the letter? Thanks
    • Please will you upload the defence in a PDF format document
    • Afternoon All - after 3 weeks of silence, this morning I received an email from HMCTS advising that P2G have rejected my claim. Decide whether to proceed Parcel2Go.com has rejected your claim. You need to decide whether to proceed with the claim. You need to respond before 4pm on 25 June 2024. Your claim won’t continue if you don’t respond by then. This is their ‘defence’ Their defence Why they disagree with the claim When choosing a service on the Defendants website, the Claimant chose to book their order with Evri and selected to take out £20 parcel protection which comes with the service. On the first page of the booking process, the Claimant entered the value of £265 for the contents and was offered parcel protection for loss or damages against their goods for £13.99 + VAT. The Claimant selected no, which then produced a pop up which explained 'We strongly recommend that you protect the full value of your item(s).' however, the Claimant still did not take this protection out and instead continued with the booking process. At the end of the booking process, the Claimant was offered this again which was refused and the Claimant continued with the booking by accepting the terms and conditions which re-iterates the information provided in the booking process. The parcel was sent, however, seems to be delayed in transit. The parcel finally started to track again, however, when delivered the parcel was empty with no contents. As such, the claim was re-opened and attempted to be settled for the £20 protection taken out in the booking process. This was refused by the Claimant as they felt they should be paid the full amount of the value entered when booking. Unfortunately, due to the refusal of the parcel protection in the booking process the Defendant is not liable to settle the claim to the value and only to the parcel protection taken out. The Defendant shall rely on the Terms and Conditions of carriage in particular section 9. The Defendant understands that the contents have not be handled with due care and attention, which is not being disputed, however, they are disputing the amount they are liable to. They have requested mediation, I’m sure not least to drag the case out even longer, but I can see no benefit to me in this and so shall reject it. As ever, I’d welcome your thoughts guys. g59   
    • I doubt HMCTS holds any data on whether arrests by AEAs required police assistance.  They couldn't or wouldn't provide data on how many of warrants issued were successfully executed - just the number issued!  In my experience, arrest warrants whether with or without bail are [surprisingly] carried out with little or no fuss.  I think it's about how you treat people - a little respect and courtesy goes a long way. If you treat people badly they will react the same way. Occasions when police are called to assist are not common and, having undertaken or managed many thousands of these over the years, I can only recall a handful of occasions when police assistance was necessary. On one occasion, many years ago, I arrested and transported a man from Hampshire to Bristol prison on a committal warrant. It was just me and he was no problem. I didn't know the Bristol area (pre Sat Nav) and he was kind enough to provide directions - seems he knew the prison.  One young chap on another committal warrant jumped out of his back window and I had to chase him across several garden fences.  When he gave up (we were both knackered) I agreed to drive by his girlfriend's house to say farewell for a while.  I gave them a few moments and he was fine. The most difficult are breach warrants but mainly in locating the defendant as they don't want to go back to prison - can't blame them.  These were always dealt with by the police until the Access to Justice Act transferred responsibility from them to the magistrates' courts. The fact was the police did not actively pursue them and generally only executed them when they arrested someone for something else and found they had a breach warrant outstanding.  Hence the transfer of responsibility.
    • thats down to mcol making that option available for you to select, you cant force it. typically if there are known processing delays at northants bulk it will be atleast 14 days later if not more.
  • 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 says My £12k CCA Regulated secured Loan will now become a mortgage!


Baz1994
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1789 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

Can someone kindly advise how to calculate possible PPI reclaim amount ?

 

I have calculated my monthly PPI interest amount figure using forum details located in which I have already paid over120 months but still have 60 months to expiry.

 

Any assistance would be appreciated as I would like to know a possible figure in order to compare with Welcome's offer if successful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 302
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

What I meant was that it would be a good idea to rad that article as it contains all of the information necessary for you to be able to calculate the claim amount.

 

There are spreadsheets at the end to help you with the figures.

 

Here is a direct link to the article.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?318646-PPI-Single-Premium-Your-questions-answered

 

If you get stuck, shout here.

 

I take it you have a copy of the agreement (or the figures from it) and a record of the repayments made?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry yes I have details of figures in question and did try to calculate an amount but didn't seem to work ?

 

I have calculated though a monthly PPI amount of £31.77 which is part of my monthly payment amount of £232.74. I have been paying this for 120 months and still have 60 months of loan outstanding.

 

I used the information from this site to calculate the said amount and now would like to have some ball park figure in mind if I am successful with my reclaim and an offer is made.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so on the basis of those figures, the PPI is 13.65% of the total loan. Just to confirm this, can you let us know the cash loan amount and the PPI loan amount from the loan agreement please.

 

If the £31.77 is correct then you will need to enter the 120 individual payments you have made thus far into this spreadsheet.

 

StatIntSheet v101.xls

 

The other point which can affect the amount of redress is the date the loan was taken. When was this loan taken out please?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank-you for your reply.

 

The figures are as follows :-

 

Loan amount is £12,000

PPI amount is £2,142.43

Acceptance Fee is £235.00

Mortgage Indemnity amount is £1,320.00

 

Therefore total amount is £15,697.43

 

APR 20.1%

Monthly rate of interest is 1.35%

 

Estimated Repayment period is 180 months

 

Inception of loan 1st November 2003

 

I may have miscalculated so any assistance would be appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will enter details into spread-sheet tomorrow morning as there will be quite a few to enter. I have located all payment details / statements from day one till current period in which I will revert as soon as possible for assistance in the matter.

 

Thanks again for your help and will advise further once completed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep you are OK...it is 13.65%

 

So if the total monthly repayment was £232.74 then you figure of £31.77 is correct so you can complete the spreadsheet as suggested above.

 

I will enter details into spread-sheet tomorrow morning as there will be quite a few to enter. I have located all payment details / statements from day one till current period in which I will revert as soon as possible for assistance in the matter.

 

Thanks again for your help and will advise further once completed.

 

:thumb:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

you cold also include MIF in this reclaim

 

that's another welcome spoof insurance product.

 

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

heres some info for you on welcome & the spoof MIF insurance.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?318323-Old-Welcome-Debt&highlight=postggj

.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?304631-Welcome-Finance-PPI-and-Mr-Z&highlight=reclaim+MIF

.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?251405-Welcome-Secured-Loan-agreement.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?304631-Welcome-Finance-PPI-and-Mr-Z&highlight=reclaim+MIF.

.

.

As per the post above the MIF is not for insurance. Welcome have admited on more than a few occassions that it is not insurance....Never has been, never will be.

.

The real question is where does the money go? They will tell you its a fee in relation to being a higher risk, and that by charging this fee, and the interest it attracts, it helps to cover them in the event of a shortfall. They will also tell you that whilst many lenders do use the fee to purchase insurance, they never have.

.

This is not only stated in the Griffith v Welcome case, but I also have it in writing directly from them.

"The MIF is a fee that can be charged by lenders when the value of loans secured on a property is at a level similar to the value of the property.

.

It is an additional form of protection for the lender in the event that they are required to repossess the property and are unable to recover all of the monies are outstanding under an agreement (i.e. there is a shortfall).

.

In such circumstances, the lender is entitled to pursue the borrower for the shortfall.

.

As can be seen by the terms and conditions of your agreement, you were charged a MIF, which meant that should the situation described above arise you would not be pursued for any shortfall.

.

This was not an insurance policy although some lenders do take out insurance policies for this purpose.

.

It was what could be described as a 'waiver fee'. It was decided in Griffiths -v- Welcome Financial Services (2006) EWHC 3769 (QB) that the charging of the fee by a lender but not actually taking out an insurance policy was entirely reasonable."

.............

collected from some thread on here .

dx

 

The MIF has not been tested in court as far as I know, I certainly will be testing it though, its a big part of my claim against them.

 

 

Last edited by MrZ; 16th August 2011 at 19:35.

I too am uncertain of the legalities regarding the MIF. I have seen and read the threads I can find about it. I started a separate thread, which is now merged with this one specifically asking about the MIF. This is what I have been able to gather so far pertaining to the MIF.

1. Its been said that it should only be applied to mortagages or secured loans of 25,000.00 or more. (I have not seen and regulation yet that states this)

2. Its been said that it should be 75% loan to value (I have not seen any regulation that states this)

3. mortgage Indeminty Fee is a fee to be used to purchase insurance. (This is not a regulation per se, but rather an industry norm. mortgage lenders will charge this fee and then use the fee to purchase insurance to protect against a shortfall)

4. In the case of Welcome, they are not using this fee to purchase insurance. (I have yet to see any explanation from Welcome as to why they charge the fee)

5. Welcome are treating this fee as a Charge for Credit and it attracts interest at the same daily rate or AIR.

So having gathered the above information from this forum and other resources, it is my intention to write Welcome regarding only the MIF. I will not include it as part of any other complaint or claim, as I want to ensure it doesnt get "muddled over" or lost amongst other issues. I dont want to give them room to wriggle out of an explanation. I am drafting the letter today and will definitely update this thread once I have a reply.

MIF is a fee the debtor pays incase there is a shortfall on the loan

this fee is an insurance policy/product

you paid for it so ask welcome for the insurance policy.

i can tell you now there will be none

it goes into welcomes own pot under WELCOME ELITE BROKERS

YOU NEED TO BE ASKING WELCOME WHO THIS MONEY WAS PAID TO AND DEMAND PROOF VIA ANPOLICY NUMBER AND DATE AND WHO THIS FEE WAS PAID TO

ILL LAY EVEN MONEY NORWICH UNION/AVIVA

 

 

............................

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?318323-Old-Welcome-Debt&highlight=postggj

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

Yep...spot on :-)

 

Right I have now completed 2 spreadsheets one in respect of PPI only and another including MIF.

 

Shall I now just await a response from Welcome as I have already submitted a FOS questionaire by recorded delivery earlier this week ?

 

In respect of the MIF shall I treat this as a separate issue and if so do I address Welcome Finance in Slough or Nottingham ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

ah shame you put the fos cq in.

 

you'll prob get a fob-off letter now for that.

 

might have been better to have lumped the mif in with the CQ too.

 

think you are best to wait now.

 

I don't think we've seen a mifdealt with 'on its own'

 

outside of a PPI claim.

 

not, sure do those threads indicate anything ?

 

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

Ok thanks

but I didn't quote any figures anyway just details regarding mis selling.

 

 

Should I have submitted the completed spreadsheet details with the FOS CQ

or just await their response first ?

 

Or shall I just forward additionally to Nottingham, advising that forgot to enclose with initial submission ?

 

and no I didn't find anything relating to the MIF being dealt with separately but may just put something in writing to that effect anyway and see what they respond with.

 

Further to my earlier correspondences shall I forward completed spreadsheet details to Welcome asking them to include with my previous FOS questionnaire submission ?

 

Please can someone kindly advise how these cowboys obtained my home and work number when I only gave them my mobile details ?

 

:mad2:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...