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 
        • 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

Second M&S PPI form


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2278 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

Has anyone been asked to fill in a second full PPI questionnaire after completing their online form? I rang them up about this and they said that the posted questionnaire had some additional questions and this would help them to assess the complaint.

 

I'm naturally concerned that this is another delaying tactic as they do seem to be going at a glacial pace. I also wonder whether they're looking for differences between the online submission (that they don't send you a copy of) and the new form.

 

On balance I don't think I'll bother to spend another half hour providing them with information that I've already sent them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I always use the FOS customer questionnaire

 

as bank forms tend to have loaded questions written in their favour.

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

seminole

if a complaint goes to the fos, then a fos form wld usually be required anyway. so, as said, shld just do a fos form in the first place (if a form is required). the fos form is acceptable prior.

if doing things online first, try and get a screen shot/print of each page before submission for own records

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I've had a reply and a settlement offer of £45.55!

This is premiums of £6.85 plus interest.

 

I had the card from 1986 to around 2002.

Having spoken to M&S they claim to not have any records going back before 2000

but they've somehow based the offer on an average account balance.

 

If I remember correctly I only had a credit limit of £750 on the card but I was running close to this for most of the nineties.

 

Am I wrong to smell a bit of a rat here?

They've now re-opened my complaint and are sending me more detailed calculations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

see what the calcs breakdown says, take it from there.

it looks like they have done a 'reconstruction' for prior to 2000.

the fos site has details about being allowed to do a recon if no contrary data is available,

and also the pdf in sticky link which has eg's of calculations. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?305682-FSA-Handbook

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for this. I read elsewhere about them reconstructing on old accounts. My subject access request should tease out what data they actually hold. I find it hard to believe that they disposed of everything before 2000 as we know from the old bank charges claims that financial institutions tend to keep very old records albeit not necessarily in computer systems.

 

Follow up email to my telephone conversation.

 

Your Ref:

CHARGECARD ACCOUNT NUMBER:

 

Dear Sir

Following my discussion with your PPI complaints team I write to reject your full and final settlement offer.

 

You have accepted that I had a chargecard account with you from 1986.

I believe that the account was closed around 2001.

 

You have also accepted that I had PPI policy on the account.

 

On this basis I find it hard to accept that in total I paid £6.85 in premiums.

 

From research I understand that your PPI charge was around 70 pence per £100 of outstanding balance.

 

I believe that the credit limit on the account was £750 for most of the agreement and I certainly had a rolling balance for most of the late nineties.

 

Your PPI complaints team agreed to re-open my complaint and send me details of the PPI calculation.

 

It would have been helpful if this could have been sent with your full and final offer as it will apparently take you another four weeks to provide it.

 

In addition to your calculations please also send me all details that you hold about this account including:

date it was opened,

the account opening form,

credit limits applicable throughout the term of the agreement,

monthly account balances throughout the term of the agreement,

PPI premiums paid throughout the term of the agreement

and any other information you hold about me in your systems.

 

Please treat this as a subject access request under the Data Protection Act.

I would remind you that a subject access request is not restricted to records held in computer systems and includes data held on microfiche, scanned documents etc.

Please let me know if you require payment of the statutory fee for this data.

Yours faithfully

Link to post
Share on other sites

thats the thing; whether a bank is being entirely accurate when saying they don't have records/info prior to x date.

i bet most do somewhere; archived, in storage, microfiche, etc.

but, the fos allows them to 'recon' if deemed justified.

if you can get any data/info to contradict their calcs in your favour

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I have form on this.

 

In the bank charges heyday I issued DPA proceedings against Santander as they claimed to not have certain data.

They miraculously found it.

 

I've just done a quick calculation.

 

If the card balance was half the credit limit throughout the term and they charged 70p per £100 of debt each month

, then the total amount recoverable including simple interest at 8% would be almost £2,600.

 

Whilst I can't remember what the balance was in the eighties

I know that I was running every credit card

I had at its credit limit for most of 1995 to 2000 and so I don't think the calculation is way off.

 

Even if it was quartered it's still a hell of a lot more that what M&S has "reconstructed".

Link to post
Share on other sites

its a bit more than that;

things like what payments were made

(which wld have paid off the premium for that month,

and therefore no accrued interest for that particular premium);

 

was there an outstanding balance,

and how much each month,

what were the monthly payments in,

when was it closed,

what was the balance when it was closed,

wld've the likely payment in covered the premium for that month, etc.

it's all in the fos info, and that pdf.

 

with yours there is 4 years of no records, thats the prob.

 

i guess they are going by what happened from 00 to 02.

 

i've also been trying to work out a banks partial recon for one and its not so straightforward as it seems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

use our FOSCISHEET.

 

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

  • 2 months later...

Well this has moved on but not very satisfactorily.

 

The Ombudman has told me that, based on information from Allianz (M&Ss insurer), the PPI account was closed in January 1990 and that they have no records prior to that date.

 

In other words there is a record of one month's PPI premium being paid and any records before that have been destroyed.

 

I find this remarkably coincidental.

 

I have asked the Ombudsman for the evidence supplied to them of the PPI cancellation

they say I will have to make a subject access request.

 

I also asked them for confirmation the M&S/ Allianz don't have any records prior to January 1990.

 

They seem a bit insulted that I have even asked the question.

 

Finally I asked whether M&S/ Allianz have ever produced records prior to January 1990 when it suited them to do so.

 

They ignored that question.

 

I am a bit surprised and annoyed by the Ombudsman's evasiveness.

 

However, I think I'll go ahead with the subject access request.

 

I'm extremely interested to know whether they have any offline records and also when the decision was made to destroy pre January 1990 transaction details.

 

I suspect that this will end up the Information Commissioner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

... I have asked the Ombudsman for the evidence supplied to them of the PPI cancellation but they say I will have to make a subject access request.

 

I am a bit surprised and annoyed by the Ombudsman's evasiveness. However, I think I'll go ahead with the subject access request. r.

maybe things have changed since, but when i wanted a copy of fos file of what a creditor had sent in, i just asked the adjudicator for a copy of their file and they obliged.

but, if you have to to do a dsar....

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

ombs or adjudicator?

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 why bother

goto the ombs himself

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

sorry ford was meant for semi

 

sounds like enough time has been spent with a brainless adjudicator meself

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...