Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Just to clarify - I make use of evening legal clinics. It is not always possible to see a lawyer (they have limited time and days/week).  This means questions one has may never get answered or there's weeks between follow-ups.   To be really clear - I am representing myself; I am playing at being lawyer/ barrister - which means I take help wherever I can get it (and then research it thoroughly). Ae - a judge in a recent hearing pointed out the receiver is not part of my current proceedings - and suggested I have a separate claim v the receiver. Disclosure has presented damning evidence v the receiver  The receiver against whom I have a complaint is not part of the receiver governing body.   The receivership is in 2 names - a joint one.  My complaint is directed at whom I was told is the lead receiver.  The other named receiver IS a member of the governing body.  But he has now left the company.  And the lead receiver has retired - but is still a working consultant on my case.   All the evidence shows it was the 'lead' receiver who was doing all the  work/ the misbehaviour.   But if the appointment was 'joint' would I make a complaint against them both?    I am sure that wouldn't go down well with the other receiver who is at the beginning of his career. The law is very much against borrowers.   But the evidence against this receivership is crystal clear.   I just don't know how and to whom to complain.   The places I've tried so far don't offer much transparency       
    • Ok, noted, thanks again. I'll share details of every communication received just to make sure.
    • Yes. I sent back the PAP form stating they hadnt supplied the correct paperwork and that pdf is what they sent back
    • have you responded to the letter of claim?
    • It's probably a good idea to come back here when the next letter from them turns up.  It remains to be seen if they will act on your employer's communication or will just continue with the cycle of their daft "threatening" letters.
  • 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

MBNA refusal help please ?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1519 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

Hi 
please may I ask for help from anybody else who has had experience with MBNA PPI. 
I took out PPI on a Credit card in 1998, card running until 2015.
i applied for PPI refund just before the deadline. 
It has been delayed many times,

 

a few days ago I received letter with the a questionnaire to fill out.

I haven’t had chance to finish this yet to return but today have received a refusal. 


Based on it was a Postal application which you purchased PPi on same day. 

We did not provide any advice or recommendations when you purchased the policy

The conditions stated you had to be 18-65 and a UK resident in permanent employment. I have checked our records and am satisfied but you were.

at the time you purchased it was 68p per £1.00 of the statement cost.

If you made a successful claim the policy could cover at least 3% of the balance in a statement period. This could have been paid for up to 12 months per unemployment claim . in the event of a claim it would have been paid until you returned to work.

i believe you would have received benefit from the PPi policy in the event of sickness, unemployment or hospitalisation and im not persuaded at the time that you had sufficient meanS to cover long periods of payments if needed.

in Addition

Any other sick pay or benefits wouldn’t have prevented you from making a claim under the policy

There were no other terms, limitations or exclusions which were likely to have prevented you from making a claim under the policy 

you could cancel at any time.

...............

heres the situation

they have awarded Plevin

however I suffer from epilepsy and am unsure if this would have invalidated the cover ?

 

Also would a postal application have asked me for any medical conditions back in 1998

I just can’t remember ? 

Thankyou for any help or advice ad

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please scan the letter upto one multipage pdf

read upload

 

So what is your problem?

you think ppi premiums should be returned

and not a plevin commission refund?

or you dont think you shourld get anything??

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

Thankyou I was asking really if because I have Epilepsy this would have invalidated my point policy and therefore been a reason to argue the policy wasn’t suitable for me.

i haven’t had a chance to advise them of this yet as they sent the refusal letter 2 days after the Questionaire came. 

Im not sure if when I applied via postal application in 1998 it would have asked about medical conditions.

i am trying to upload the letter now but struggling

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

no would have simply been a tickbox if you wanted it 

and anyway they weren't regulated in 1998.

 

unless you did and sar got all the info first there's little you can really do now.

but a plevin claim for a 1998 card till 2015 should be in the £1000's anyway I expect.

 

cant comment without seeing the letter follow my last post please

  • Thanks 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

pers i'd except that

 

you ticked the PPI box

it was quite correctly an unadvised sale at that time

and at that time they were unregulated anyway so didn't even have to carry out any checks and even if they did or did not, there is no-one that can tell them they were wrong at that time

 

they cant escape plevin as they admit you signed up for PPI, so they were offering PPI

and they are already down on record they attained more than 50% of your policy sale from the PPI underwriter as a backhander so....

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 cant claim both

 

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

  • 2 months later...

HI @dx100uk 

 

please could i ask ask your advice ? I sent Sar req to mbna re the above. MBNA have taken over  a month to replyi need to send proof of address utility bill or passport to Lloyds branch to be verified.

 

however I sent them a Utility bill with my request due to fact MBNA account was at my old address with parents. I have rang them to advise already sent Utility bill, they are saying I must go to branch with my ID so they can see me in person and only then will they start the 30 day request period. 

 

Os this correct ? It runs my time down if I need to Send to FCO. 

 

Thanks for yor help 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Read the sar link and all its posts

 

What has a concert orchestra got to do with this?

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

Sorry meant FOS ! Auto update.

 

I’ve read the Sar post

can’t see thing about it going  to lloyds bank to prove identity

 

I have already sent themselves utility bill asked on phone if I could email Council Tax or passports copy told no have to take proof to bank to be signed in person. Then 30 days begin. Very annoying given I’ve waited over a month already. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

did you send ctax with original request.?

yes they can ask for suitable i'd .

 

dx

  • Thanks 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

shame, they shouldn't be pulling these stroke, but ok get it done

 

 

  • Thanks 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

  • 1 month later...

I have received my Sar info back finally.

Advised I especially wanted the Credit Card agreement / Terms and Conditions.

( As I wanted to see if there was any info regarding excluding medical conditions from the PPI claim as I have Epilepsy).

 

Have received all data back including statements ( only available from 2011) not held between 1998-2011 it says.

they say they don’t have my CCA adding though that they would have required sight of a signed agreement.

 

They haven’t put anything about Terms and Conditions so I can’t check whether Epilepsy diagnosis would have been excluded. 

Is it worth me appealing this to the FCA on the grounds the cover wouldn’t have paid out or not ? 

 

I have been offered plevin at £1400 but a full payout would have been a lot more this Ian when i am querying. 

 

Thanks for any advice you can give 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 07/11/2019 at 21:33, dx100uk said:

pers i'd except that

 

you ticked the PPI box

it was quite correctly an unadvised sale at that time

and at that time they were unregulated anyway so didn't even have to carry out any checks and even if they did or did not, there is no-one that can tell them they were wrong at that time

 

they cant escape plevin as they admit you signed up for PPI, so they were offering PPI

and they are already down on record they attained more than 50% of your policy sale from the PPI underwriter as a backhander so....

 

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

Thankyou for that, so even though in my letter they say they have checked records from that time and I was eligible and the premium would have paid out under sickness ( even though the sar says they don’t have any records).

thanks for your advice. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 07/11/2019 at 17:02, Waterloo1 said:

Based on it was a Postal application which you purchased PPi on same day. ...

We did not provide any advice or recommendations when you purchased the policy...


i believe ...There were no other terms, limitations or exclusions which were likely to have prevented you from making a claim under the policy 

 

it was an unadvised ppi policy sold by them, you chose it, you didn't tell them you suffered Epilepsy...

the above statement is thus sadly true...

now had you told them of your condition AND they still accepted you..that would be another matter.

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...