Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • N120  https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/601bc2fee90e0712851bfd75/n120-eng.pdf
    • OH has received another call from Kindertons requesting a signature. He once again requested in writing that he was not liable for any costs as he has been told from the beginning. The woman insisted he would not. He asked her hypothetically what if Kindertons take the other party to court assuming they won't pay the hire charges, who would then be liable for the court fees and hire charges would it be him? The woman who apparently sounded like she was reading from a card replied not him. An email has now been received from Kindertons. I would be grateful for advice on this matter bearing in mind no forms have been signed. Good Morning Please keep this email as confirmation that no costs will be charged to yourself for the cost of the Hire. Whilst you are liable for the hire charges Kindertons indemnifies these losses. The third party insurer will pay the hire charges and if for any reason the charges are not paid Kindertons will not pursue you for payment of these charges. The only exception is if you knowingly and wilfully mislead us or actively fail to cooperate with our attempts to recover the hire charges from the third party insurer. If you would look to sign the outstanding Hire agreement it would be gratefully received. Many thanks
    • Yes Andy. It arrived last week but I was away for a few days. I moved house in the middle of last year as well so some post is redirected which can delay things by a couple of days. I have informed the courts of my new address
    • Good morning. OH was offered treatment for back pain via a solicitor which he accepted. This has been ongoing for several weeks. He originally told Kindertons he did not need a vehicle from them as he'd driven his vehicle home from the accident and continued to drive it to work for a week but the woman insisted it would be free and more importantly would speed up the claim process. He told her due to his work he only need a small vehicle but a brand new top of the range large vehicle was delivered. His vehicle was written off and an offer made. He had the vehicle repaired himself. There was no loss of income as he continued to work while fitting in medical treatment. On three separate calls he asked if the vehicle was free and was told yes they just need a signature to chase the other party for the cost. He informed her in more than one call he doesn't use the internet so cannot sign electronic forms. 
  • 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
      • 160 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
  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 442 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

Just a little help needed

 

I have already read here and some months ago after finding some old MBNA statements sent a SAR and have received pages and pages back from them.

 

I have tried reading here several times but keep getting lost and distracted but the way i see it i can either do the simple 8% spread sheet or the compound interest spread sheet but understand there may be a problem getting anything back using that method ??? am i right.

 

If i decide either what to date do i enter ??? the date the account was closed ( well sold to Link where i am still paying back) or today's date

 

This is going back to 2003 when i had the card and being self employed i assume any PPI is worthless.

 

If someone could let me know i would be very grateful

Link to post
Share on other sites

well 1stly why are you blindly paying link anything

they are a DCA and have ZERO legal powers.

 

you charge compound int up until the day the OC stopped that

then take that figure and pop it into the statint sheet the day after as a whole sum.

 

the claim to date on the CISHEET will be the last day they [the OC] charged you at their int rate.

 

have you been getting statements from link?

as I bet they are charging you interest

 

expand on the debt history please.

 

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

Ok mmm right sort of got it lol ... do bear with :)

 

think i saw a post from one of your colleagues and what i did was loaded the cisheet with all the ppi transactions and did from date account opened 2003 to date account was sold to Link 2009.

 

I then took that figure and put it in the statint sheet from date account was sold to link 2009 to current day .... ??.

 

Now the ppi stopped being charged late 09/2008 and after that to 04/2009 it was just Finance charge ..

which im guessing that's the interest.

 

Ok so bit of history ...

like i said it was sold to Link 2009 at £3956.39.and they took it to court Jan 2012 …

i had contested there being no signature on the credit agreement as i was sure i applied online but they produced one and claim was awarded.

 

However i immediately i applied for a Variation order and my offer of £10 per month was accepted and i have paid it religiously since despite them sending me constant letters telling me i need to give them my total household income plus expenditure details of other creditors etc to which i just ignore and keep sending the £10.

 

They did however obtain a charging order .

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep seems you've got it right

 

is the debt on a jointly owned home, but the debt is solely yours?
 

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 the debt is in my name only not my wife and yes the house is joint owned. 

I have a letter from the people who tried to help me when I had to go to court over the charging order ... I'll scan it and when I can work out how to block out bits I'll post it 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So it's only a restiction k.

That's why they keep pushing you

It's useless to them

As it's not a full CO

Worthless

 

Shame you lost the can claim. 

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

  • 4 months later...

Could someone just take a look at the letter sent regarding my PPI when you have 5 mins.

when i submitted my claim I added all the ppi using the CISheet V101 and got a value £3733 i then added that to the STatINTshee v101 and got a total £6728.

 

I received a letter (attached) and have no idea how they have come up with the value but it is lower by a fair ammount.

Could someone take a look and let me know their thoughts and my options.

 

Also tody they sent a check for the ammount stated on the letter so should i bank it even if i intend to dispute

 

Thanks

 

 

 

 

 

 

anybody had a chance to take a look and give me their thoughts

 

Thanks for taking a look.

Do you think i should bank the cheque they have sent.

Copy of StatIntSheet v101.xls

2019-09-04 MBNA PPI refund details.pdf

Copy of CISheet v101.xls

Link to post
Share on other sites

cant see anything wrong with your sheets

they agree with PPI charges total

and have awarded more CI int

 

they seem to not be understanding that from the date of the card sale [when their int stopped

you are entitled to 8% stat int on that sum till they settle.

as the statint sheet calcs.

point that out to them

ask them for a complete breakdown.

 

think its better not to cash that cheque 

 

 

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

I believe you could also write in your letter that you accept the cheque as partial settlement toward your on going complaint.

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

according to the FOS redress guidelines

I am entitled to 8% statutory interest on redress sums whereby you have prevented me from investing said figure.

 

your interest stopped on [date] resulting in the sum of £2140.32 on PPI premiums of £1780.55, giving a total of £3920.87.

thus I should be entitled too 8% statutory interest till the date you settle, not £454.45.

 

dx

 

 

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

  • 1 month later...

So I have sent a letter to MBNA stating the above and have not had any reply from them.

So how long should I wait do you think ... 

The letter was sent sign for so I know they have received it.

Any views ??

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

I see you've reported a post.

 

That means only Site Team members can see the content.

 

It would be better to post here so all the other regulars can chip in.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry but i disagree with their assumption that the statint 8% (which is NOT compounded on our sheet!) can only be charged when an account is in credit.

 

the increased balance was caused by the admitted unlawful PPI policy monthly levy, this they subjected to their interest rate until they stopped charging it, the point of sale.

 

i will however, erm on the side of caution as we have no data from you that proves, from statements, when the original creditor last charged their interest rate.

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...