Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
  • 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

Car Insurance cancellation


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6568 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

About 3 weeks ago we put a posting on another thread about cancellation charges. (Well when I say 'we' I mean 'him in doors' who hasn't got the hang of this posting lark yet!). It should have gone into a new thread really. It reads

 

Just had the very same problem re car insurance. Although they say I will have to pay all future monthly payments (up to November, about £200.00 ) because I have had a claim in this insurance year. The thing that annoys me is that I bought a new car (group 8 and asked them for a new quote to cover it, replacing my existing group 14 car. They quoted the same premium for the group 8 as the group 14. (Part of the reason for buying the new car was to reduce costs.) When I asked why, they said it was because I had had a claim in this insurance year. I did then ask if there was a penalty for cancelling the policy and was told no. So I went and insured the new car with Direct Line at a reduced cost. Have just attempted to cancel my old policy and been told to pay up. Of course they have your notification of no claims bonus which you need for the new insurers.

Banks, insurance companies, I hate them all!!

 

Following that posting we have written to Cornhill and said we require a letter of No Claims Bonus (which was protected) and complaining about the charge. We pointed out that the earlier call advised there would be no penalty for cancellation. The reply now received says that the full payment is due for the remainder of the year because of the claim in the year which is within the terms and conditions. There is no comment about the no claims bonus letter.

 

Now all this has a familiar ring to it but before we go ahead and write back saying

1. Give us a copy of the transcript of the call and

2 Terms & conditions cannot be unfair and that we feel this is penalty which is unlawful. Something along the lines of the letter in this thread

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=3313

 

This way we will have a double whammy - either we can claim it back as we were misinformed or because it is a penalty.

 

Any one spot any obvious mistakes?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What we want is to cancel the policy without having to pay the rest of the year (we have been paying by monthly instalments). We think we were misled in the first place as the girl on the phone said there would be no penalty if the policy was cancelled. Alternatively can we claim it is an unfair penalty to make us pay for a full year if the policy only runs for about half the year? We just want to walk away with our certificate of no claims discount and not have to pay for the rest of the year. Is that possible or have we got the wrong end of the stick?

There aren't actually 2 penalties just the rest of the years' payments.

Hope that's clear

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me look into it and get back to you.

 

As far as I am aware it should be written in the policy booklet about claims occuring and policy cancellation.

 

But give me a few hours and I will come back with a definitive answer.

 

LOULA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeh Hah!!! Success

 

We wrote to Cornhill and sent it by email on 2 May.

 

I am writing to you following my letter of 5 April 2006 sent by recorded delivery. Since that date I have not received a reply but I do seem to have a further letter from you dated 20 April 2006 acknowledging the cancellation that took place by telephone a couple of weeks earlier. The Royal Mail has confirmed that my letter of 5 April has been delivered.

 

As my earlier letter pointed out your staff advised me that I would not incur any penalty for cancellation and so the contents of your letter dated 20 April 2006 are incorrect. Please let me have my certificate of No Claims Discount within the next 7 days.

 

My letter of 5 April 2006 was clearly a complaint and should have been dealt with as such. You have published that you will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days and deal with these within 4 weeks. This means you only have until 4 May to provide the certificate. If you have an alternative method for times of dispute such as a letter of confirmation that will be accepted by another insurer this will be acceptable as a temporary alternative.

 

It is important that you appreciate I am not prepared to accept that there are further payments due and this is based on the information given to me by your staff. If you are disputing my statements you will have to provide me with a transcript and copy of the recorded conversation detailed in my earlier letter within the next 7 days.

 

I am sending a copy of this letter by e-mail and I suggest you use the same medium to ensure prompt conclusion.

 

Email arrived this afternoon. The threats obviously had some effect. Letter attached is being sent by post as well. Extract from reply

It is my understanding that your complaint is centred on the information that was provided by our Customer Service Department in connection with the cancellation of your policy. Therefore, I have monitored the telephone calls made on 10th March 2006 and 29th March 2006 whereby you discussed this matter.

 

 

 

Within the telephone call dated 10th March 2006 our Customer Service Associate states that she has referred your query regarding the premium associated with the proposed new vehicle to our Underwriting Department. Whilst I can appreciate that the new vehicle is in a lower group rating, our Associate does explain that due to the claim within the insurance year, there would be no reduction in the premium and that the full premium is owed.

 

When entering into a contract of insurance, a customer agrees to pay an annual premium in return for a guarantee of protection in the event of a claim covered by the policy. If payment is made by monthly instalments, we allow this to continue for the duration of the policy. However, if the policy is cancelled, the remainder of the annual premium immediately becomes due. This is clearly stated in our policy booklet, General conditions 5 and 10.

 

Our position regarding the above was clarified within the telephone call dated 29th March 2006 whereby you contacted our Customer Service Department to cancel the above numbered policy.

 

That said, I can appreciate that within the former telephone call you had specifically queried whether any penalties would be incurred if you cancelled your policy. You were informed that you would not be liable for any penalties as you were in the second year of insurance with Cornhill Direct. Therefore, it is my belief that this has led to the confusion regarding the remaining premium to be paid.

 

In light of the above I have waived the outstanding balance of £243.39 as a gesture of goodwill on this occasion. Please also find enclosed written confirmation of you no claims bonus entitlement. I trust you will find this to your satisfaction and that we can close our file on this matter.

 

Fantastic result. I am skipping about the place now. Another good result for the small man (and his wife).

 

Right now let's get the banks into court, I'm feeling lucky!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 09 March 2019.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6568 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...