Jump to content

You can now change your notification sounds by going to this link https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/index.php?/&app=soundboard&module=soundboard&controller=managesounds

 

You can find a library of free notification sounds in several places on the Internet. Here's one which has a very large selection https://notificationsounds.com/notification-sounds

 

 

BankFodder BankFodder

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi all,   I had an Lloyds bank overdraft in 2019 with the overdraft amount being £1350 maxed out by December 2019. I had left the account alone for two/three months as the overdraft fees were basically ruining me(Adding to the £1350 overdraft), i then received a letter from Lloyds asking me to phone them regarding this debt (This was January 2020). I had phoned Lloyds and we went through an expenditure on the phone and the outcome was i was to make payment of £30 towards the debt for 6 months and then after the 6 months is up they would get in touch with me to discuss further options. (There was mention in January that after the 6 months there was a possibility of a loan to pay of the remaining balance and then you make payments against the loan for however many years/months you choose.) It is worth noting that whilst i was making these payments they seized all interest on my account.    I have made every payment since January and have gradually managed to reduce my overdraft down to £1200. My problem is that the bank have phoned as it now at that stage for re-discussion, they have asked me to go through another expenditure and i panicked and over estimated things to make it look like i had less income; not loads but i was in a deficit of -£47. Due to this they said they could not allow me to take out a loan as it would only mean i was borrowing more to pay of debt which they would not allow. It then got passed over to another team and he said that i only had two options. Take a one month break with all interest etc stopped and this will allow me to seek financial advice elsewhere, or they said they would default the payment and i can then pay the minimum i can afford but the default would stay on my credit file for 6 years. He mentioned that they wouldn't take any money of me to help clear the debt as i had a deficit of -£47 and that shows i financially cannot afford to do that option. I have looked at the effects a default can make to your credit file and it impacts it tremendously.   Lloyds asked me how i cover my expenses every month and i mentioned that my Grandparents help me out sometimes with cash flow. So the gentleman at Lloyd's suggested going away and asking my grandparents if they could contribute money to me to help aid in my debt. so that he could go back to the original team(I think collections team) and say she now has this ____ He is due to phone me on Thursday (Tomorrow). I can afford to contribute probably £50-£80 a month but it would mean cutting down on fuel and some other expenses.   Its worth noting that i have a credit card with Nationwide maxed to £1000 too and this will soon be at the stage where they charge interest and i cannot afford to clear this either. Is this worth writing to them about?   Is there anyone that can advise me on what to do to help me pay as little as i can and avoid the default PLEASE, any help is really REALLY appreciated.   Thank you all in advance.
    • In terms of whether or not this is a private sale, clearly it will be for a judge to decide. It seems to me that we have somebody here who bred a litter of puppies and has sold several of them or all of them at probably around £1200 each. I think that is very different from selling your own private second-hand car to get what you can for it in order, for instance, to buy another one. Anyway it's for the judge to decide. In terms of whether or not the seller is aware of the defects – if they are a private seller – all it really means is that they are not subject to sale of goods legislation so that a purchaser in a private sale does not have specific protections. After that you have to fall back onto the common law of contract and once again I think that the liabilities are reasonably strict and I still think that even in a private sale if you bought something with defects which was represented to you as being without defects then you would probably have a good case. In this case, the dog has been accompanied by a health certificate and I think that is as good as any kind of representation dog is without defects. I think we are coming to an altogether more interesting issue. Apparently the dental defect with this puppy is observable and could have been detected by any reasonably careful examination carried out by a reasonable professional. But apparently also there is the possibility that there may be a more complicated problem which could be addressed by work costing up to £2000. What I'd like to know is whether this more complicated problem is as a result of the failure to spot the initial problem. Even if the initial problem had been spotted, with this still be a possibility that this more complicated work would be necessary? I suppose what I'm getting to his that at what point does one decide that a defect is an unacceptable defect or simply a risk that comes with purchasing all animals and therefore could still be considered as "satisfactory" because it would meet the reasonable expectations of any reasonable pet owner. To put it bluntly: are we saying here that if you buy an animal is less than genetically perfect, that you are purchasing defective goods and you are entitled to a refund? Does this mean that all animal traders are obliged to ensure that all the animals they sell are genetically perfect? This is dangerous territory: eugenics.  
    • a dn can be issued even on one default payment.
    • I think I still remain to be convinced that a court would not find the seller's offer to take the puppy back and give the OP a full refund both reasonable and acceptable.   Ignoring that this is the sale of a puppy, isn't this more akin to the private sale of a second-hand car?   I don't really know what the phrase:  "I recently bought a puppy from a home breeder. They have never breed dogs before and aren't a licensed business" means.  Is this a business to consumer sale, or is it simply the opportunistic private sale of puppies from a domestic litter?  I think the OP needs to establish this because it's not clear to me - yet.   AIUI, if I as a private individual privately sold, say,  a car with umpteen non-apparent faults or defects with it, but I was honestly unaware of them and could not be expected to be aware of them, then I'm not liable for any breach of contract when those faults and defects manifest themselves to the buyer a week later.  Isn't that what worried private sellers of cars are told here when aggrieved purchasers threaten to sue them?  It's not immediately obvious to me why this is necessarily any different - unless this is clearly a business to consumer sale.   The OP also says:  "Our puppy was sold as having passed a full health check from Vets4Pets", and so far as I can see this isn't disputed.  Unless that health check revealed the dental problem the OP is now complaining about, but the OP never was shown it (seems unlikely that the seller would mention it but not make the results available), then I think the seller may well be entitled to rely on it.  What more could they do to ascertain the health of the puppy?   I think this is not necessarily a clear-cut claim, and from the way the OP describes the breeder I think the question whether this is a consumer sale or a private sale may not have a black or white answer.     1.  The OP mentions following advice to buy puppies bred from a "home pet" (or similar such wording).  Not clear if this was the case here, but if it was, doesn't this suggest a private rather than consumer or trade sale?   2.  The OP also suggests that the health of the puppy was misrepresented, but is this necessarily correct?  They say the puppy was advertised as having had a "full health check", but that's not the same as saying the puppy was actually healthy.  And if it was a private sale, is the seller required to declare health problems they are aware of if they aren't specifically asked?
    • Ok,    I thought it may of helped as their DN stated 2 installments in arrears when it was issued on 10/2/17, but it would infact only have been 1 installment overdue 17/01/17.   I will keep to what I already know and stop over thinking further issues. 😁    
  • Our picks

    • Currys Refuse Refund F/Freezer 5day old. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422656-currys-refuse-refund-ffreezer-5day-old/
      • 5 replies
    • Hi,  
      I was in Sainsbury’s today and did scan and shop.
      I arrived in after a busy day at work and immediately got distracted by the clothes.
       
      I put a few things in my trolley and then did a shop.
      I paid and was about to get into my car when the security guard stopped me and asked me to come back in.
       
      I did and they took me upstairs.
      I was mortified and said I forgot to scan the clothes and a conditioner, 5 items.
      I know its unacceptable but I was distracted and Initially hadn’t really planned to use scan and shop.
       
      No excuse.
      I offered to pay for the goods but the manager said it was too late.
      He looked at the CCTV and because I didn’t try to scan the items he was phoning the police.
       
      The cost of the items was about £40.
      I was crying at this point and told them I was a nurse, just coming from work and I could get struck off.
       
      They rang the police anyway and they came and issued me with a community resolution notice, which goes off my record in a year.
      I feel terrible. I have to declare this to my employer and NMC.
       
      They kept me in a room on my own with 4 staff and have banned me from all stores.
      The police said if I didn’t do the community order I would go to court and they would refer me to the PPS.
       
      I’m so stressed,
      can u appeal this or should I just accept it?
       
      Thanks for reading 
      • 7 replies
    • The courier industry – some basic points for customers. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421913-the-courier-industry-%E2%80%93-some-basic-points-for-customers/
      • 1 reply
    • The controversial sub-prime lender says the City watchdog is investigating its practices.
      View the full article
      • 0 replies
beetlejuice01

Motor insurance claim against my son. Need advice.

Recommended Posts

Does he even need a name for the third party?  So long as they have her registration number can't they find out who her insurer is and send a claim to their third party claims department?*  I can't remember for sure, but doesn't Askmid allow you to identify who the insurer is in circumstances where you know the car's registration number but you don't know who was driving? This sort of thing must be happening umpteen times a day across the country.  I'm sure Uncle Bulgaria would know.  (Or as BankFodder has already suggested, get details from DVLA - if that's possible).

 

All the OP's son needs to do is claim off them, including a copy of CCTV as evidence.  The insurer then asks their client what's going on.  You don't actually need to have had a physical collision to be at fault and cause an accident.  And if she says it was your son's and the other bloke's fault because "they were speeding" - how does she know?  Either she didn't see them, so she doesn't know how quickly they were going, or she did see them and saw they were speeding, in which case she should not have pulled out.

 

*If you are in an accident, the fact you are uninsured does not (so far as I know) prevent you suing a third party who caused the accident.  You being uninsured should not affect fault questions.  Of course the police may become interested if they find out... although not here it would seem.

 

PS - How on earth did your son become involved with this garage?  How did he become so embroiled that he felt obliged to buy a used courtesy car in the first place?  Something here smells really fishy...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if the garage persists in saying RK transfer at the DVLA is proof of ownership then either (1) they really are trying it on and have no better argument/proof, or (2) they don't have a clue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Manxman in exile said:

And if the garage persists in saying RK transfer at the DVLA is proof of ownership then either (1) they really are trying it on and have no better argument/proof, or (2) they don't have a clue.

 

I think that's overstating it. RK and ownership are different things, I agree, and RK doesn't prove ownership. But if there were a dispute over ownership, and the other documentation/evidence was missing or  ambiguous, and it went to court the judge might consider that the actions of the garage in transferring RK before the accident had evidential value in support of their claim that the son owned the car before the accident. If the son did not own the car why would the garage transfer the RK? It would be an unusual commercial practice.

Edited by Ethel Street

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought for a contract to purchase to go through there had be be consideration paid, to the seller before ownership passed to the buyer.

 

If there is no evidence of such consideration having been paid, then the Insurers noted on the DVLA MID database should be the liable party under Road Traffic Acts.

 

The garage to have continued to Insure the Car under their Traders policy is further indication that they still considered they owned the vehicle, as the purchaser had not paid them the price agreed.

 

It may be worth contacting the MIB  (Motor Insurance Bureau) about this and just seeing whether they have any information which might help.

 

https://www.mib.org.uk/contact-us/

 

 


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, unclebulgaria67 said:

I thought for a contract to purchase to go through there had be be consideration paid, to the seller before ownership passed to the buyer.

 

OP's son paid £200 according to OP which garage says was part of the purchase price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Ethel Street said:

 

I think that's overstating it. RK and ownership are different things, I agree, and RK doesn't prove ownership. But if there were a dispute over ownership, and the other documentation/evidence was missing or  ambiguous, and it went to court the judge might consider that the actions of the garage in transferring RK before the accident had evidential value in support of their claim that the son owned the car before the accident. If the son did not own the car why would the garage transfer the RK? It would be an unusual commercial practice.

 

I don't disagree that in the absence of other evidence the registered keeper record is the next best thing.  However, I'd also be arguing that the very absence of other evidence suggests that there may not have been a transfer of ownership at all before the accident.  What sort of garage would let the car go with money still owing without some documentary evidence?  (Well, we can all speculate about that...)

 

The question "why would the garage transfer RK details on DVLA if they hadn't sold it?" is a good question.  It would be very interesting to see the V5C issued immediately after that transfer just to ensure that the DocRef date (the date when the transfer to the new keeper was actually made on DVLA and not the effective date of transfer) is pre-accident.  Wonder if OP's son still knows, or if it can still be checked?  (How do we know the transfer was actioned pre-accident?  The effective date may be pre-accident, but when was it done?).

 

I see you've just posted again...

Edited by Manxman in exile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ethel Street said:

 

OP's son paid £200 according to OP which garage says was part of the purchase price.

 

What I don't understand is why the OP's son, who apparently drove a very nice, expensive(?) car such that people might think he was "loaded", would end up agreeing to have his car sold so he could buy a second hand used courtesy car from a garage.  I don't have a particularly expensive car but I've never had a courtesy car I'd have swapped for the car I owned.

 

It may be irrelevant legally, but I think if I understood why then I'd understand this situation better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ugh... there is nothing worse than seeing someone in trouble ask for advice, then subsequently ignore all the advice and let themselves be screwed over. Terrible read, ruined my day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...