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
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2309 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

I put in a PPI claim against Grattan and have been notified that they have turned my claim down. The letter I have received states that my account was started in October 1993 and the Payment Protection Insurance was taken out on the 22nd March 1994. It also goes on to say.........


All of our policies are optional and have always been sold as such. The Payment protection insurance has shown on every monthly statement you have received where charges became applicable and has made reference to the policy and it has always been possible to cancel at any time by whatever means and without penalty.


Processes have always been in place to ensure that the conversation with one of our sales people complied with legal requirements that were in force at the time, including the obtaining of consent. As a consequence of that consent, the product was recorded as being active on your account.


They go on to say that this is their final response but I have the right to refer my complaint to the FOS. I did this and was told that because it was sold before 2005 they can't help, I expected this so no surprise.


As it was such a long time ago I honestly cannot remember any conversation and couldn't say 100% that it did or did not take place. Is it best just to forget about this with Grattan or should I ask for proof of said conversation, If it was a telephone call then they wouldn't have any proof would they?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest that you put in an SAR immediately. Accompanied by a cheque so that you can keep tabs on the process of the request to a certain extent.


Have you any basis for saying that the policy was mis-sold? Do you want to say that you never chose it, or that you were told that it was necessary, or whether it was not suitable to your needs?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for replying BankFodder. What information would the SAR get me? Would it include a copy of my agreement to the PPI? I have quite a lot of old statements still which show the PPI on it or Complete Care I think it was called but nothing from when the catalogue started. My account is still running although I haven't used it for years and years.


To be perfectly honest I didn't really question the charge and thought it was something that was necessary, I was young when I took the catalogue out, I believe through one of the leaflets that used to appear in magazines. I was just eager to be able to afford new clothes as I was on a YTS scheme at the time and not paid a lot. I don't recall anyone mentioning it to me or any call but as it was such a long time ago I can't be 100% sure. My job at the time was as an office junior on a scheme and my employer always paid sick pay at basic rate which wasn't much less than I was being paid if I remember correctly.


I'm guessing that my basis for mis-selling isn't a strong one and should probably just let it go.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not possible to tell what it would reveal so long after the PPI was taken out. Maybe they don't have any information at all but in that case it would be reasonable to ask why can they be so certain that they follow their rules and that the policy was properly sold.


Another point that you should be asking is whether you were ever told that commission was being paid to whoever sold it to you and what that commission was? This itself is a basis for saying that the policy was mis-sold.


An SAR for only £10 is a very good value way of rooting around in order to see what further information you can get. Maybe you should find out about Complete Care, who ran it and what has happened to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

before 2005most if not all the industry was unregulated , what they state is sadly correct.

now you could find out who the underwriting insurers were, they might well have been.

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...