Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have received a PCN from Euro Car Parks for MFG - Esso Cobham - Gravesend. I was completely unaware that there was any such limit for parking and always considered this to be a service station. I stopped there to use the toilet, have a coffee and made a couple of work calls. I have read the previous topics on this location which suggest I can ignore this and ECP will not take legal action. The one possible complication is that the vehicle is leased by my employer so I do not want to involve them with the associated reminders and threatening letters. The PCN was first issued to the leasing company Arval who have notified ECP of the hiring company. I have attached a copy of the PCN Notice to Hirer with details removed as per instructions. What options do I have or should I just pay the PCN promptly at the reduced rate of £60? img20240424_23142631.pdf
    • What you have uploaded is a letter with daft empty threats from third-party paper tigers.  Just ignore it. What we need to see is the original invoice you received last October or November.
    • Thanks for posting the CPR contents. i do wish you hadn't blanked out the dates and times since at times they can be relevant . Can you please repost including times and dates. They say that they sent a copy of  the original  PCN that they sent to the Hirer  along with your hire agreement documents. Did you receive them and if so can you please upload the original PCN without erasing dates and times. If they did include  all the paperwork they said, then that PCN is pretty near compliant except for their error with the discount time. In the Act it isn't actually specified but to offer a discount for 14 days from the OFFENCE is a joke. the offence occurred probably a couple of months prior to you receiving your Notice to Hirer.  Also the words in parentheses n the Act have been missed off. Section 14 [5][c] (c)warn the hirer that if, after the period of 21 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to hirer is given, the amount of unpaid parking charges referred to in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)(f) or 9(2)(f) (as the case may be) has not been paid in full, the creditor will (if any applicable requirements are met) have the right to recover from the hirer so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Though it states "if any applicable ...." as opposed to "if all applicable......" in Section 8 or 9. Maybe the Site could explain what the difference between the two terms mean if there is a difference. Also on your claim form they keeper referring to you as the driver or the keeper.  You are the Hirer and only the Hirer is responsible for the charge EVEN IF THEY WEREN'T THE DRIVER. So they cannot pursue the driver and nowhere in the Hirer section of the Act is the hirer ever named as the keeper so NPC are pursuing the wrong person.  
  • 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

Welcome: 'i Don't have a valid PPI complaint'?


craigten
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 617 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

Good evening all.

A few weeks ago I remembered that 22 years ago I used Welcome Finance to buy a car.

I thought I remembered being cheesed off at the time with them adding some extras on but couldn't be sure.

I sent them a SAR and, unbelievable, they responded with my data (although actually just two PDFs, one with their privacy notice and one showing my old account.

However, I must admit that I don't seem to be able to understand it properly.

In the below PDF it shows that there were 'extras' (Insurance default, Old mechanical breakdown, collision call and Old shortfall / Gap insurance) added but it says in one page of the PDF that they were started 10/05/1998, ended at different dates but then shows 'cancel date' was 2/06/1998 - less than a month after they were added.

However, you will see on the second page, showing the account, that on 19/5/1998 'Insurance Premiums Advanced' of £236.03 were added as well as 'Disbursal of fees' of £55.

the second PDF they sent, it states:

Terminology Appendix

Please be aware that for the outcomes listed below, you don’t have a valid PPI complaint against

Welcome Finance.

Non-regulated - Pre June 2000 Sales

This policy was purchased prior to Welcome Finance’s voluntary membership of the General

Insurance Standards Council (GISC) which began on 27th February 2003.

The (then) Financial Services Authority agreed that any non-regulated insurance sales (that is, those sold prior to Welcome Finance’s membership of GISC) are the responsibility of the insurance underwriter.

Due to the date on which this policy was purchased, the PPI mis-sale complaint must be referred to the underwriters of the insurance for it to be considered.

Unfortunately Welcome Finance does not hold records of underwriter agreements prior to June 2000 due to the time and as such we are unable to confirm the details or provide information about the underwriter of the policy.

When selling insurance policies, Welcome Finance was acting as an agent of the insurance underwriter under a signed contract.

The earliest contract signed by Welcome Finance and an insurance underwriter of which we have retained a copy is dated June 2000.

In terms a complaint for PPI mis-sale, as the insurance underwriter does not seem to have had a written contract with Welcome Finance, it considers itself to be outside of any regulatory liability obligations.

Although PPI-mis sale is the responsibility of the insurance underwriter and not the lender, any complaint pertaining to an unfair relationship due to the sale of PPI is the responsibility of the lender and as such, WFS will consider any such complaint where valid.

Out of Scope - Date Range

As you did not have an account open as of 6th April 2008, you cannot complain about an unfair relationship due to undisclosed commissions in line with the Financial Conduct Authority Policy Statement PS17/3, issued in March 2017.

Please can I ask for some advice on my perhaps naïve question of - are they correct re any claim being out of scope?

Sorry for being confused.

converted (1).pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

any possible PPI claim will be against the underwriters, who would have been regulated at the time. in most cases [check up] they were [eventually] aviva I believe. there would be no time limit.

 

welcome are then talking about the situation regarding a PLEVIN reclaim of unfair undisclosed commission they got paid by the underwriters for selling their product..this is why they are relating to the time limit, which does apply.

 

i'll read the letters later.

but the bottom line without the at least full agreement or statements , theres very little chance of reclaiming the PPI itself 

but the thinks they list, would all be classed as PPI regardless of the various 'names' they use to sc@m people out of money inc GAP which WAS ppi too.

 

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

only one Page...??

can you please not use a hosting site

put everything in one multipage pdf and attach it here by drop n drag in the bottom of every msg box .....choose files

 

though if there is an outstanding balance I cant see you getting anything anyway.

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

Apologies, it’s the only way I could see of providing the relevant parts.

I’m unsure how to edit the PDFs they sent me so as to not show the personal details?

 

The balance was / is zero, I just didn’t provide the whole 4 pages.

 

Any ideas as to how to redact the personal info from a PDF?

 

Here you go, all the relevant parts with my details removed.

Thoughts would be welcomed (not a deliberate joke)...!

 

 

 

 

welcome docs.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

bang shot yourself in the foot

why did you mention PPI in the sar request?

 

looks like you still paid for ppi. {£236.03}

 

unravelling the crap in the letter

it looks like your can make a PPI reclaim directly to welcome

even though they were not GISC regulated, they are saying the underwriters were, but they cant say whom they were, but from other threads here it should be easy to work that out if needs be 

 

so you had a loan of £2269.44 of which 236.03 was PPI

 

so ppi/loan*100=ppi%

 

236.03/2269.44*100=10.4%

 

so anything you paid 10.4% of it was for ppi

so statint sheet time

 

 

 

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

Two things to say;

1. I’m absolutely positive that I sent the standard DSAR template with zero mention of PPI!!!

2. Thank you for this unbelievable help, honestly, I don’t know where I’d be without you guys.

 

Just checked and I sent the standard DSAR template with absolutely no mention of PPI!!!

 

 

Forgive my nativity but doesn’t it say that the PPI, etc was cancelled after one month, but the invoice shows it was added and not cancelled?

Link to post
Share on other sites

so they owe you

 

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

Again, please forgive my naivety but I'm struggling to work out which is correct - on one page they say they were cancelled but another shows the account and where it was added but then I can't see it taken off? 

I'm just trying to play Devil's advocate here in case it comes to court?

Link to post
Share on other sites

they charged you for it..no sign of a refund in the statements.

quite typical of welcome of that era to remove all the vehicle related stuff as they were trying to get approval to GISC and that was one of the things spotted by the regulators ...they were to that point making gap/mec/col compulsory.

 

notice also it says insurance default..which means they were still making PPI compulsory and did so in certain geographical areas deeming it a risk area until they eventually got GISC approval when they then too removed the compulsory PPI as GISC said they couldn't do that after arguing for several years about it with the regulators .

 

its all in archive posts here from Postggi. 

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

  • 2 weeks later...

already answered in post 7

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 claim section 69 interest (8%) on top of your final figure within your court claim...only a court can award 8% on top of the PPI claimed

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

they were not charged you..they were clearly removed in the docs you posted up?

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

well get the FOS CQ and the statint int sheet done first along with a covering letter

then they have 8 weeks

you cant just jump to court no.

 

you should know all this already.....

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

Maybe I should...but I have a hell of a lot on my plate, but thanks for the advice.

 

Re ‘should know this already’, I guess it depends on your frame of reference for ‘should’?

It’s been over eight years since I went the court route and have never made any reference to, or been part of a conversation about a ‘statint int sheet’, I don’t even know what one is.

Edited by craigten
Link to post
Share on other sites

well that's of your doing..

prioritise things that need to get done so you don't miss PPI timelimits.

the rest can wait..

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

aha..i was going by the amount of recent threads...:lol:

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

Quick one,

I know that I have a HSBC PPI issue that I really need to get going on before the deadline (although I am very grateful to you guys on here for advising that I can make a PPI claim before the deadline,

and then continue to gather information, just so long as the claim as been put in). but does the deadline include PPI claims such as this to a 'non-bank', please?

Also, please can I have a hand with how to go about making a statutory interest sheet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...