Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Is Single Premium PPI always added to the loan?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2640 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

Hi

 

Every time I read about Single Premium PPI,

I am always told that most financial institution will add the cost of the policy to the principle loan and pass both amounts to the borrower as said loan as per the credit agreement.

If most do that, what do the others do?

 

I ask as my partner a had Single Premium Policy which was deemed mis-sold

however she never actually received the cost of the premium

ie the premium was not added to the principle loan and deposited in her current account,

 

 

although the cost of the Single Premium was added to the loan account to be repaid, which she did.

I think she was swindled but she says it is not the case.

 

Can anybody advise regarding my question above?

 

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

frontloaded loan PPI is rarely paid to the borrower then taken back

its paid to the insurers at disbursement of the funds

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

 

Thanks for replying. Let me try and illustrate better using my partners real loan examples as to why I am confused.

 

Loan 1

Principle Loan: £5,000.00

PPI Single premium: £900.00

Credit deposited to the borrowers current account £5,900.00

Funds credited to loan account for repayment: £5,900.00

 

Loan 2

Principle Loan: £7,000.00

PPI Single premium: £1,010.00

Credit deposited to the borrowers current account.£7000.00

Funds credited to loan account for repayment: £8,010.00

 

Using the examples above the credit deposited to borrowers current account seems £1,010.00 light. Hence my original question. So, my question really is, which one of the approaches above is the usual or correct one?

 

Confused!

 

Any thoughts on the above?

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

no you ret reading it totally wrong.

 

ppi gets paid to the insurers in bulk [upfront] from the loan account

nothing to do with the borrows current account.

 

anyway stop worry about nowt

get that PPI refunded.

but do it properly using the FOS CQ

and the spreadsheets from here.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?330996-Latest-Spreadsheets-PPI-Claims-and-Charges-Claims-Dec-2011

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?318646-PPI-Single-Premium-Your-questions-answered(1-Viewing)-nbsp

 

 

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/ppi.html

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

 

I actually read it correctly and have found the error.

 

 

For Loan 1 the bank deposited the £5900 into the current account and the loan account.

However they must have realised they made an error and took £900 back.

It is listed as a 'fee' on my partners bank statement directly under the £5,900.00 deposit.

 

So the example in Loan 2 was indeed the correct approach.

 

Thanks for clarifying things for me.

 

With regard to the PPI, I've already had confirmation of mis-selling of the PPI on both loans and am just awaiting confirmation of the money to be returned after I queried the figures on offer.

 

I've also got confirmation of mis-selling of PPI on my partners credit card also.

 

Total to be returned is £9,350.00 (subject to queries).

 

Thanks again for you help.

 

(PS I used the links you provided also. They are very useful tools)

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes we took a longtime in writing that many moons ago.

nice you spotted the mistake they made as it was confusing me too as to what you were relating too.

 

 

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

Its a shame really. I thought they had swiped some funds illegally and was going to use that as a premise to get my Partners £7.000.00 she clocked up in bank charges returned when she had the account. (1999 - 2009)

 

I'll have to find another way...

 

Hey ho!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...