Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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 
        • 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

RBS - PPi and life insurance on same claim?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 960 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

rather see letters than your interpretation please 

  • Like 1

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

why have RBS refunded all the other stuff if thats in the same boat ...outside of 6yrs????

 

i believe you also said earlier that this is now paid to aviva? so ....its still active

 

timing runs from when you became aware you could reclaim...its obv you didnt know this in 2003when it was sold to you , nor until very recently.

  • Like 1

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

short and curt...

 

dx

  • Like 1

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

On 10/02/2021 at 14:44, NGEddie said:

When looking into complaints, I am guided by the rules from our Regulators, the Financial Conduct Authority. These rules are known as the Dispute Resolution rules, or DISP rules. These rules place a responsibility on customers to raise any complaint or concerns within a reasonable period of time; a complaint should be raised within six years of when the advice was provided or, if later, within three years from when a customer first became aware (or should have reasonably become aware) that they had cause to complain.

 

if the above were true and is the stance of your bank, bearing in mind ALL other policies, including this xxxx policy, which is our mutual  concern today and were all on the same initial original complaint letter,  why have they all been accepted as mis sold and have already been refunded ? Why suddenly is this time policy only relevant to this part of my complain?

  • Like 1

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 thank you for your letter dated xxxx, it's contents are duly noted.

 

then as above

  • Like 1

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

saves postage

 

  • Like 1

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...
On 03/11/2020 at 13:56, NGEddie said:

Hi HB

 

Sure, I recall being told I had to have the decreasing term life assurance alongside the mortgage which started in 2003 and this was by an advisor in the branch.

 

I submitted the PPi claim in 2019 in time which covered a loan ppimortgage ppi and this decreasing term life assurance. I referred to them all together as 'ppi and associated insurances' on advice.

 

They have admitted to miss-selling the loan in 1998, the mortgage ppi in 1999 but are saying there is a separate decreasing term life assurance team who I now need to make the complaint to which is where I am a little concerned?

 

Hope this helps.

 

E!

 

Anyone advice please?

 

Really not sure how to reply as feels like they are trying to separate the ppi and life assurance by pushing me to the other department. The whole thing with this was to group them together 

 

expand on the above, not got time to scan further back, but are you indicating that the reason for  this life protection was a loan that has since been deemed mis-sold by the original creditor?

 

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

read the letter in post 23 here 

Payplan - Cover My Life & Cover My Payments - Debt Management Plan Companies - Consumer Action Group

it explains how the 3/6yrs works straight from the ombudsman's mouth.

 

 

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

try now

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 don't think the matter of you were told the Decreasing Term Assurance was compulsory makes any difference, it doesn't detract from the fact the FOS appear to agree that disp does apply and you are out of time .

 

i don't think there is any harm going to the FOS with it..BUT

although, and this twigged my memory about DISP ( which didn't exist then) but the ABI code did, and i believe that doesn't cover your situation, i'e , the fact it was made compulsory is not against any guidelines that were around at the time.

 

you could drill down on the ABI coding and see what it advised about lenders making DTA compulsory, but sure as eggs is eggs, by 2005, when disp had arrived..all lenders were forced or had stopped long before making any type of life cover compulsory. so they knew their mis-selling of such was on the cards

 

Critical illness cover (financial-ombudsman.org.uk)

 

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

there is no link between the 3 and 6yrs limits.

they are sep entities 

 

you are being told under the 3yrs disp rule that you are out of time, the FOS seem to concur - re that other threads letter, however that rules might not apply if you have exceptional circumstances.

 

i am wondering if to date the lack of ref to the ABI code of conduct, if it applied in your case, fits the exceptional circumstances criteria.

 

you need to go look at the ABI code of conduct. i'e it should not have been made compulsory, i don't believe the other code DISC was in force till 2005

 

AFAIK ABI covers aLL INSURANCE PRODUCTS NOT JUST ppi....MIGHT BE A ROUTE?

 

 

ppi GISC + ABI code info case omb-decision-C.pdf

  • Like 1

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

the mortgage it protects is still active is it not?
 

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 mean you paid the mortgage off that the policy protected and financed it with another policy from elsewhere...???

so why have you been paying for life insurance on a mortgage that has not existed since 2009?

 

surely the policy was to protect the mortgage is was taken out for and no longer has any benefit whatsoever to you and no-one will get anything out of it should you die?

 

what does it state it protects and who gets what ?

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

what does the policy actually do?

if you died tomorrow what would happen ?

what payouts would goto who about what?

why don't you directly ask aviva?

  • Like 1

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

oh well only 4yrs to go.

what a con from day one...

 

HB this policy was sold together with various PPI products upon taking out an RBS Mortage in 2003, everything else they agreed was mis sold and has been refunded in full.

 

but because they say this is not PPI so is not covered by the changes in DISP waving the 6yrs rule toward anything PPI, reclaiming this is out of time, and to boot the mortgage it was taken out with was fully paid off in 2009...

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

Not reclaiming wise no.

But for the sake of £xxpcm till its term ends you have life or poss critical illness/injury cover still worth £1000's if anything happens.

Imho its not worth stopping now as i bet there is no cash in nor cover once you cease payment

 

Dx

  • Like 1

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

  • 5 months later...

open

 

 

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

54 minutes ago, NGEddie said:

However, I haven’t been able to find anything that would lead me to

believe that you were told this plan was compulsory in 2003.

 

other than the advisor getting a healthy commission back hander for selling it....

 

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...