Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Ryanair did not appeal - so ended as expected :-)
    • Quick update in case its helpful to anyone in the future.   Covid made things a little different i think, there was no prosecutor to talk to however the legal advisor to the magistrates was helpful and happy to make the decision to do the deal, this took place in the courtroom, although i had spoken to someone (i think an advocate) half an hour before who had made them aware of what i was asking. All was relatively pain free and ended up with a £3xx fine rather than the £8xx, and 3 points rather than 6.   Thanks for all your help MITM
    • Thank you for this – and thank you for the donation. You need to check your PayPal email address because that was the email which was used for it. It would certainly be nice to think that Hermes didn't know how to handle a claim for Conversion – but I'm afraid I think it is most likely that it simply escaped their notice – the whole thing. Anyway we'll see. There will be lots more conversion actions in the future and if and when they actually respond to them, will see how they deal with it.
    • Just to add, it may well be that the camber was slight – but coupled with the momentum of a vehicle, sliding on slushy ice, it doesn't take much to add that little bit of extra speed or momentum to a skidding vehicle   Also, you say that there was "not a lot of bend" at that site. Frankly I disagree. I think there is quite a pronounced bend and also the position of the van – which is roughly in the position of the white car in the image below – was pretty close to the band and if you imagine that it had started pulling out before the OP appeared and started to make its manoeuvre and was far enough in to the road to have a gap done its left-hand side that a Vauxhall Corsa could pass down, then I think that the bend was sufficiently aggressive to have been of concern to a prudent driver – who was parked on the wrong side of the road, who was trying to cross the carriageway to proceed on the other side of the road who had parked close to a bend and he was aware of the icy circumstances.     In fact if we take the width of the van at 72 inches – 6 foot. In order for it to be far enough out into the road to allow sufficient gap for a Vauxhall Corsa to pass down it, it must have been all of 11 foot into the road. The OP tells us that she lives there – and maybe she would be kind enough to measure the width of the road where the van was.  It is a narrowish  stretch of road
    • Yes I got the full amount back including compensation for the hassle and SAR that I requested as per the claim plus the court fees (£60 initial fee + £77 warrant fee). They had not adjusted it at all.   Am sure you're as surprised as I am that they didn't respond. But I do think they knew they had no defence against the conversion of property point, and backed by how quickly the judgement was issued by the Court. All positive and I hope whoever goes through something similar can use this as an example! It is your property and they are just providing a service regardless of the T&Cs!   Yes that donation is from me but not sure why it came from another email!   See attached the judgement with my details redacted.   All the best!     Hermes_GucciBag_Judgement.pdf
  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 27 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

Abbey Payment Care Mis-sold and now sits with Royal London books

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 963 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts



I took out a mortgage with Abbey National in June 2003 and I was advised by the in branch adviser that it would be wise to take the paymentcare policy with the remortgage and additional loan which was added to the mortgage.


I have been paying this every month at a cost of £52.55

- which by my calculations means I have paid £9511.55 to date.


My issue is that I didn't actually require this insurance at the time of remortgage but the adviser stressed that it would be "very helpful" to my application.

Wishing to get the loan agreed I took the paymentcare insurance out.


The reason I didn't need it was because I would receive 6 months full pay from work if I was sick, followed by another discretionary 18 months at full pay if required. I also had life insurance with my employer 4 x annual salary so my loan obligations in case of sickness or death would be met.


This original mortgage was paid in full when I sold the property.


Would someone be able to advise whether I have reason for a claim and if so where do I start?


Many thanks for your help.

Edited by dx100uk
Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you still got all the paperwork?

And it would be +8% stat int too on top

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...