Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • DX - the lease agreement does state that the car has to be handed back in a drivable condition etc. SO I was forced to pay for the clutch repair to allow this to happen. It was a frozen morning when the girl turned up for the car - had I known this I wouldn't have repaired the bloody windscreen, but when it was booked it was crapping with rain for days...
    • BankFodder,   I didn't record calls, because they were simply me asking to speak to the complaints handler, and being told he will call back. Twice a day - and phone records will show this. If push comes to shove a FOI request for their call records will back this up. When you lease a car, you can take it with or without servicing - our broker advised not to take servicing. It was out of warranty after 3 years. But my argument is the lease was for 4 years/32K miles - although we extended if for an extra year, it was still within the mileage, and the clutch failed and the windscreen leaked. In my opinion it wasn't fit for purpose and the lease company are in breach of contract by leasing a vehicle as such.  
    • My signature on that cheque is nothing like my signature, but I took a copy of it in case they try to use it.    I have read up and maybe I should explain better the reasons I said I may be better off with them.   First I would look to settle and from what I have read you can often settle for anything from 50-80% of the total debt and secondly, if I cannot settle they cannot charge me the 14.9% BC will charge me, although from what you have said it sounds like I am wrong?    
    • Would have been better that you didn't give them a signature to lift, but difficult times persist.   As for better being with a fleecing dca than the OC..well no as an OC does issue speculative court claims on a whim.   you need to get reading up here on cag
    • Here is my first draft of a PAP letter:   Dear Sir or Madame.   As it has not been possible to resolve this matter amicably, and it is apparent that court action may be necessary, I write in compliance with the practice direction on pre action conduct.   On the 9th September 2020 I entered into an HP agreement with Advantage Finance to purchase a Ford Kuga 2013 registration xxxxx. Within less than 2 months and a total 1500 miles the car developed a gearbox problem. After speaking to Ford regarding this matter they confirmed that the gearbox must be serviced every 35k, in the service receipts that were supplied with the car the first two have been done but there is no paperwork for the most recent, Ford have confirmed that the most recent service was only for the engine and not the gearbox as recommended by them.   From you I am claiming that under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 you have supplied a car that is not fit for purpose and is not of satisfactory quality. It was also sold as having a full service history where this now is no apparent   From you I am claiming: purchase price of £xxxx plus, 2 months of road tax and 2 months of insurance.   In accordance with the practice direction on Pre-action conduct I would request that you provide me with copies of the follow document:   A full breakdown of 100k service that was not included with all the receipts. A full breakdown of all work carried out whilst you had taken ownership of the car.       I can confirm that I would be agreeable to mediation and would any other system of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in order the avoid the need for this matter to be resolved by the courts.   I would invite you to put forward any proposals in this regard.   In closing, I would draw your attention to paragraph 15 & 16 of the Practice Direction which gives the courts the power to impose sanctions on the parties if they fail to comply with the direction including failing to respond to this letter before claim.   I look forward to hearing from you within the next 28 days.   Should I not receive a response to my letter within this time frame, then I anticipate that court action will be commenced with no further reference to you.  
  • Our picks

    • 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
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

PPI County Court Claims help please


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 815 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

Hi all

As I prepare to challenge failed FOS claims I thought I would ask if anyone has done this successfully and can share their experiences and statement of truth.

FOS determined that they could not handle an Amex complaint because PPI started before the regulations started, because I ticked the PPI box with Cap1 then I needed PPI, and finally currently that a PPI form Egg (Canada Square) sent them contining neither yes or no I want PPI meant that I wanted it...

Finally I would like to claim for the time I have spent putting together my claim... would this be acceptable to the court???

ANY help advice would be gratefully received,

thanks

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

you mean particulars of claim...a statement of truth .. is your witness statement.

 

have a look at these

https://cse.google.co.uk/cse?cx=partner-pub-8889411648654839:6449422593&ie=UTF-8&q=PPI+Cpurt+Claim&sa=Search+CAG

 

and don't forget the shelley threads and martin2006 claims

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...