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
      • 160 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

RBS ppi claim-offer made then money sent to their own holding account???


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2529 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

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

yes they did win so can you...

 

 

offsetting to a sold debt or buying it back and off setting is almost the same result.

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

No they are not directly related accounts IMHO

 

As per that FOS link

 

But

Look at a letter from AIC

It will state their client

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

So aic were chasing for payment on an rbs loan

Or was it the old Lombard loan?

Or was it the old finance loan for direct line insurance?

 

Clear as mud here

Which is why we are getting nowhere fast,..........

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 what debt do they want to offset the PPI against??

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

then they've done nothing wrong if they own the direct line loan debt

its PPI from the same loan

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

well you don't worry about AIC

they are powerless as I've said before

 

 

also that link referred to PPI on one account being refunded again a debt on another

 

 

as far as I can see

your PPI refund is from a direct line debt

and the PPI is being refunded again the debt on the same account

 

 

so the FOS example 'win' doesn't cut it

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, that's looking grim I grant you?

 

What about the fact I'm in a DMP

 

When they eventually pay the money into my DMP (which is presumably what they will do)

 

 

Can i state that I should decide what debts are paid off as the PPI wasn't a debt?

 

Or can I argue I have more pressing debts than those in my DMP (mort arrears etc)?

 

Also, the refund is in my name only, yet the loan account is in joint names.

Am I clutching at straws a bit here?

Link to post
Share on other sites

why cant the money goto you and you decide where it goes?

 

 

whats the DMP and who with?

 

 

joint debts make no odds

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

nothing to do with them

a DMP company have no powers over where any money goes

nor do RBS!

other than debt to themselves.

 

 

hope you've sent a CCA request to all the fleecers stepchance are blindly paying?

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

why do you keep referring to AIC

NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM..

 

 

rbs will take off what they want and the rest will prob come as a cheque I guess?

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

AIC AIC AIC AIC

just kidding.

So there is no way of fighting this then, in your opinion?

Just wait and see?

But I have already sent it to FOS anyway so may as well let it run now hey?

 

And what will a CCA request acheive?

 

Also, in your link, the Ombudsman says there are tax implications and another reason why he upholds complaint.

Any idea what this means?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I'm now waiting for Adjudicator decision, but they have hinted that I have no chance.

 

Yet a decision on their database the Ombudsman say's the following about a similar but not exact case

 

http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk/viewPDF.aspx?FileID=5623

 

"Mr and Mrs M have informed this service that they intended to use the refunds they were

due to alleviate financial hardship that they faced. Although it is not necessary for me to

know the full details of these hardships, the fact that they have a number of accounts that

have been placed with HSBC’s collections team, would suggest that they also hold debts

elsewhere. I consider that it is fair and reasonable for Mr and Mrs M to be able to determine

which of their financial needs they consider to be the most pressing."

He upheld their complaint and made the bank pay the money to them.

 

Then there is this one

 

http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk/viewPDF.aspx?FileID=48676

 

complaint upheld again

Don't really see much difference to mine

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

well

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

Great News!

 

Where, what, when ?

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The Great News was...............................

I am a Grandparent!!!

 

The BAD news was I lost the complaint.

 

I don't see how it is fair that some Ombudsmen let the complainant decide who they pay, but my ombudsman said he couldn't say RBS had acted unfairly.

I argued that my need was far greater than RBS but all to no avail

 

Anyway, thanks for your help.

Sorry if I sounded sarcastic at times but it was one hell of a stress ride.

 

Perhaps I should sue them now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...