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

Monument claimants-can you assist please?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6359 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

My wife has got in her statements from Providian/Monument,and to be honest there aren't too many problems with it.

 

However,there are a few occasions when she went overlimit.There is a bit at the bottom of the statement which says-"YOUR ACCOUNT IS OVERLIMIT.TO AVOID FURTHER CHARGES PLEASE DO NOT USE THE CARD UNTIL YOU PAY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LIMIT AND BALANCE

 

Fine-however there is no fee itemised anywhere on the statements.They obviously have charged something,otherwise they would not have used the word "further" as regards charges.

 

Can anyone tell me what Monument charged up until August in 2006,during 2004,and for Providian during 2003, for overlimit fees?

 

many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is £24 for late payment fee and £24 for being over your limit. It is printed on all the statements so if you had been charged it would be on there.

 

I am claiming £480 back from them in charges and I filed in the court today. I sent a prelim letter and an LBA and they ignored them all!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Evening...I was just thinking exactly the same, as I have just this evening added up all my charges - £1082 in total from around 2001 to present.

 

BTW, it's the older statements (pre 2002) that is like this for me.

 

Prelim will be sent tomorrow.

 

Robin

Joint acc - Halifax - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 06 Oct 06, some statements received 24 Oct 06 - £264 so far! Prelim sent 26 Oct 06. here

 

Bills acc - Halifax - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 06 Oct 06 - £957 so far. Prelim sent 31 Oct 06

 

Old Student Account - £1082.49 charges and contractual interest - Prelim sent 01 Nov 06

 

Capital One - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 26 Oct 06 here

 

Monument - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 26 Oct 06 here

 

Wifes old Lloyds TSB - Gonna nail 'em

Link to post
Share on other sites

:-)

 

24/10/2002 Late Charges 18.00

24/12/2002 Late Charges 18.00

24/01/2003 Late Charges 18.00

22/09/2003 Late Payment Fee 24.00

 

and they were £24.00 until

 

20/06/2006 Late Payment Fee 24.00

22/08/2006 Late Payment Fee 12.00

 

Until then

 

going N1 next week

 

Monument Card 20/09/06 Prelim £1638.74 , Partially Settled £672.00 Refunded 10/10/06

 

That is how its gone so far...

Case Statistics 13 Wins - 0 Losses

Cases In Progress 2

Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife has got in her statements from Providian/Monument,and to be honest there aren't too many problems with it.

 

However,there are a few occasions when she went overlimit.There is a bit at the bottom of the statement which says-"YOUR ACCOUNT IS OVERLIMIT.TO AVOID FURTHER CHARGES PLEASE DO NOT USE THE CARD UNTIL YOU PAY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LIMIT AND BALANCE

 

Fine-however there is no fee itemised anywhere on the statements.They obviously have charged something,otherwise they would not have used the word "further" as regards charges.

 

This has happened to me as well, with the legend alluding to charges being made but none added. I take it as a warning, nothing else.

 

Mike

If I've helped tip my scales

 

Blair Oliver & Scott, £2500 written off December 2006 Default removed January 2007:D

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/56001-mike220359-blair-oliver-scott.html

 

Monument, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

Lloyds TSB didn't sign the agreement!

:D

 

Citicards, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

RBS tut, tut!

:rolleyes:

 

Morgan Stanley, oh dear

:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...