Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Mis Sold Pension


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1785 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

I believe that I was subject to maladministration / mis sold pension when I moved out of Barclays Final Salary Scheme into its Retirement Investment Scheme (RIS) in 1998. Sedgwick Noble Lowndes (SNL) were commissioned by Barclays at the time to manage the process. SNL produced a glossy brochure which painted a very misleading picture of the benefits of moving to the RIS and a short questionnaire which purported it to be a ‘no brainer’ if you scored less than 60. I scored 56. If only I’d have had access to the internet at the time! I was very naïve and gullible.

 

I have complained to the Pensions Ombudsman who have asked that I make a complaint through the schemes IDRP first before they can investigate. The Ombudsman has acknowledged however that there was an assumption in the process that younger people were likely to be better off in the RIS. The importance, they say, is whether the assumption was reasonable at the time?

 

Please could you help me to tackle this assumption in my letter of complaint. I need some good evidence to prove that my employers assumption was wrong. I was 31 years old, married, with two young children, and in good health. I had at that point worked for the bank for 15 years. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

as they say, you need to complain the the barclays pension trustees first.  the onus of proof lies with them because they introduced you to the other bandits  so all you need to show is what you would have got if you stayed in the scheme and what you will geT now (and can they pay the diference without being forced to) they will know thier figures if you cnat work it out so all you need is your projected or known pension. Do you still work for barclays or are you after a top up for your pension to bring you up to the level you would have had at the time you left Barclays?

Link to post
Share on other sites

How much paperwork do you have from 1998, Jane, in particular about the assumption of younger people being better off?

 

As ericsbrother says, you will need to compare the pension the Barclays scheme would have provided with what the RIS is predicting it will provide.

 

Are you claiming against Barclays or Sedgwick Noble Lowndes which became part of Marsh Mercer towards the end of 1998?

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have got copies of the brochures that were issued and a copy of the questionnaire. The questionnaire score led people under the age of 34 to move away from the Final Salary scheme. I have got to prove that the assumption they made was not the right one at the time.

My claim is against both companies, I feel that they are equally culpable. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone here will know what the assumptions were if they aren't in the literature you have. They should have been worked out by Sedgwick's actuarial team based on projected investment returns and so on, so it's probably a question for the scheme trustees.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

the paperwork should give examples, I think that a growth rate of 8% was one of the chosen ones to give figures, there were higher and lower ones but these would appear in the printed forecasts.

so, get your complaint into the Barclays trustees now and they will have to show ther hand if they wnat to deny your claim. For the moment you dont need to hang figures on how much worse off you will be, this is about the advice and how it came about. The Ombudsman wil get all of the numbers later but as they have told you, you need to go through the correct procedure and that will be laid out in the terms of the scheme itself so ask for a copy if you dont have one.

Also answer the other pertinet questions, do you still work for Barclays? what are you after at this time?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually left Barclays at the end of 1999 so it is only 15 years service but still it makes a big difference to me. The growth rate used in the projection was 9.5%, which even back then was relatively high risk I think. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, they only used 9.5%  fund growth rate - expected investment return for the Retirement Investment Scheme. They also used 9.5% annuity purchase rate - assumed to calculate the cost of buying a pension at retirement. They used an assumption on salary growth 7.5% through to retirement. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There were a large number of cases that went through the Ombudsman that were of a similar nature to your so all you have to do is make your complaint in the correct manner and I'm sure that you will see something to your advantage in around a years time.

The PO was giving you a very strong hint when they told you about using the complaints procedure

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...