Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Recommended Topics

  • 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

Debenhams PPI / Santander


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1992 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

Submitted claim for mis sold PPI on Debenhams store card in Feb 2016.

The card was sold to me whilst being served in Debenhams clearance dept in 2000.

Queue of people waiting : assistant "crossed" the parts of the form including payment protection.

 

Santander dismissed my claim

: not mis sold

: Couldn't refer to FOS as pre- regulation.

 

However Santander then wrote back after the Plevin ruling.

Possible unfair relationship because of the commission.

 

They rang me last week for further info ie employment, savings etc at the time I took the card out (18 years ago!!).

They say I will have a final response by 5th July 2018.

 

Not holding my breath, but let's see.

 

Am I correct in my understanding that if they refuse my claim I can then contact Genworth Insurance and if they also refuse I can then refer Genworth to FOS??

 

Many thanks as always

Link to post
Share on other sites

hope you didn't answer their questions on the phone?

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

to be honest so much time has passed since I took the card out : I couldn't answer anyway and I said all of the info will have been on the original form. I submitted a copy of the application form with the assistants markings on it. I got the feeling they were trying to trip me up!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

good well spotted that was what I was hoping you didn't fall into.

 

there are numerous cases in the FOS examples of the x by tickboxes whereby the rep got about £25 everytime they signed people upto PPI.

 

did you do a spreadsheet and workout what you are owed?

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

you trained me well!!! they were asking things like if I served a probationary period in my job etc etc.... No I didn't do a spreadsheet but have used the sheets on this site more than once with great success. I think that's my next job. However it's whether or not i Paid more than 50% commission on the premiums?? thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

no its whether THEY paid 50% or more not YOU, typically most PPI policies charged you

 

don't confuse hidden commission Plevin reclaim [ the backhander GE money would have gotten from the provident [glenworth?] for selling their PPI insurance]

with the PPI you paid during the course of you usage.

 

two very diff things.

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

Yes I see about the two different things:

had similar from LLoyds recently regarding the commission which they paid out on but we will see what happens.

 

But that was for a credit card and I went to the FOS,

who suggested to Lloyds that it was an unfair relationship because of the commission.

 

Couldn't go to the FOS with this Debenhams / Santander as it's a store card pre: regulation.

 

But I understand if they refuse regarding the commission I can then go to Glenworth ,

 

and if they in turn refuse I CAN then go to the FOS re Glenworth??

 

many thanks

Edited by cleo4patra
ommission
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Rang Santander for an update :

in theory final response day this week

: they said it's still being investigated.

 

They said they've a backlog of these claims that have been awaiting advice from the insurer but they now are ploughing their way through them.

 

At this rate they'll have had my complaint from when I first lodged it for almost three years!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

complaint closed : letter from Santander they say no flaw in the sale and I would have bought the policy anyway. Probably because it was pushed on me whilst waiting in a queue in a busy clearance department in my lunch hour!!!

 

I am now going to write to Genworth Life style Protection stating this . not giving up!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry to be a pain : got the paperwork out again.

 

Only just noticed the assistant didn't put a cross next to "Employment Status" on the application so clearly didn't ask about my Employment status at the point of sale.

 

Also could this be classed as a pressured sale as I was in a queue of people in a very busy clearance department , was asked if I wanted to save 10% there and then by taking out a Debenhams account?

 

I am now going to approach Genworth who I believe are the underwriters.

 

Thank you

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

putting an x by sign here here and here is leading you on and giving advice so cant be a non advised sale

you were advised where to sign...all they wanted was the sales commission in their pocket.

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

putting an x by sign here here and here is leading you on and giving advice so cant be a non advised sale

you were advised where to sign...all they wanted was the sales commission in their pocket.

 

thank you for that as always :

 

I am now writing to Genworth asking them to re-visit my complaint.

 

Received Santanders 4 page final response saying they have grounds to say I would have bought the policy in any event!! .

 

Santander have said it's time barred under general legal principles having 15 years from the point of sale to bring a claim at court against SCUKL .

 

They also say I may still be due redress under Plevin.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

ppi is not time barred

its when you discovered it could be reclaimed

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

ppi is not time barred

its when you discovered it could be reclaimed

 

anything to wriggle off the hook !! I thought that was a bit dodgy !! Thanks

 

I've written to Genworth asking them to re-visit my complaint . For the life of me cannot believe they think it hasn't been mis sold given the circumstances of the sale.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...

Hope you get what you deserve! I've just had a letter from Santander with exactly the same wording "there are grounds to conclude that you would have bought the policy in any event” for a GE Money card from years back. It's actually for a really tiny amount, but found it so rude I'm going to fight it anyway!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...