Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Notice of Sums in Arrears & Unlawful Default

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2451 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

16/11/15 Loan Start Date £200

26/03/16 Default Notice (Did not receive)

01/07/16 Default Registered

26/10/16 Account Settled

17/08/17 Complaint to Creditor (Dismissed)

31/08/17 Referred to FOS (Ongoing)


07/10/17 Letter from Creditor (Very important)




Took out a payday loan for someone in my name - stupid I know.


The agreement was signed and funds were transferred on 16/11/15.

No repayments were ever made.

Apparently a default notice was issued on the 26/03/16 but I do not recall receiving such notice.

A default was then registered on my credit file on 01/07/16 and I settled the account on 26/10/16.

The default is now showing as satisfied on my credit file.


I made an official complaint requesting the company remove it immediately because I didn't receive the notice.

The complaint was dismissed and currently with the financial ombudsman.


Since referring the case to the FOS they magically produced said default notice but it's the first time I've ever seen the document and it's missing legal information.

I believe they made it up purely for the sake of the complaint....


I received a letter yesterday from the creditor (bare in mind the case is currently with FOS) saying they should have send me a NOTICE OF SUMS IN ARREARS in accordance with section 86B of the CCA 1974 on the 16/06/16 and that they are sorry for any inconvenience caused.


They go on to state there was a system error that prevented the database from generating the notice.

This notice contains information about what I could have done to bring the account up to date and consequences of ignoring the notice.


Please refer to the dates above

- am I right in saying now they have owned up and apologised for not sending me this notice (required by FCA) that they wasn't entitled to enforce the agreement (Arrears Notice Penalty)?


It's bad enough I didn't receive the default notice but now this......

..I'm living a nightmare!

Is this new grounds for default removal?


Credit profile is now clear this is the only thing tarnishing it!


Any advise or template letters appreciated.

Edited by Reign
Link to post
Share on other sites

The loan was defaulted upon

It will show for 6yrs regardless to you settling it


the NOSIA is nowt to to do with that

Neither is the fact you didn't get the dn



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...