Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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
    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
  • 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

New policy / Old insurer / SAR


tired mommy x
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 459 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

Hello. I have just set up insurance for my son as his policy has run out.  I have requested the proof of no claims and been advised by U Drive Cover that the proof of no claims has already been issued to 'Haven' his new insurance company and they are unable to issue another one.  This is not the company I have insured the car with and he certainly has not taken out any new policy.  His girlfriend has spoken to his insurers and the finance company 'Close Brothers' and a company who she thinks is 'Haven'.  From what she can gather a policy has been taken out in my sons name, said policy is now cancelled, proof of no claims will be issued when a cancellation fee of £1200.00 is paid.

 

Close Brothers advise they are investigating U Drive Cover.  They say they are investigating Close Brothers.  Both are investigation Haven.  Nobody will confirm who the 'new policy' is with until the cancellation fee is paid.

 

I have sent an SAR to Close Brothers, U Drive Cover and Haven Insurance (in Jersey??).  Sent 6th December.  Nothing from Haven or U Drive.  Close Brothers advise they can not process until I send photo ID and proof of address.  Once they have it, they will process my request.  As I am not sure which of these companies  is possibly doing something wrong as they all seem to be investigating each other, I am reluctant to send anything off to them.

 

Is it normally to request ID and a utility bill for an SAR?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid that to get a subject access request disclosure, you will have to satisfy them as to your identity. This is the only formality that they are entitled to apply.

Haven are based in Jersey, you say – but where are close brothers based?

It certainly seems to me that a data disclosure is essential here. If you can find out what information has been released to Haven and who has released it then you have an excellent basis for a very serious claim

 

Presumably there was a previous insurance policy with U drive. When did it expire? Where are they based?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would one Insurers issue proof of no claims to another Insurers ?  Unless they were linked to each other and they passed on the information.

 

Surely you get a renewal notice with the no claim discount showing and you send this to the new Insurers ?

 

All sounds very odd !  Are you 100% certain that your Son has not had contact with anyone regarding the renewal of the Insurance ?

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is certainly a puzzling story. 

 

As to who is who in this, Haven Insurance are, I believe, in Gibraltar not Jersey but are authorised to offer insurance in the UK. So they can legitimately insure your son's car.

 

 'U Drive' are a UK insurance broker who specialise in finding insurance for "high risk" drivers - young drivers with bad claims/convictions records, expensive cars etc

 

Close Brothers provide finance to people who can't to pay the full premium up front. It appears Close Brothers paid the full premium to Haven and entered into a finance deal with your son for him to repay Close Brothers in installments. Or so it is alleged. The financing deal with Close Brothers would likely also have been arranged by U Drive.

 

Are you certain neither your son nor his girlfriend have arranged any motor insurance? If not the other possibility is some sort of fraud using your son's name is being carried out.

 

Does your son son have a bad accident/claims record? The premium must have been enormous to generate a £1200 'cancellation' fee.

 

I'm surprised the companies were willing to disclose anything to your son's girlfriend if she isn't the policyholder.

 

Come back here when you have Close Brother's SAR

 

You say you are submitting a SAR but surely your son needs to do that if he is the policyholder? It's the data Close hold on your son that you need so he has to submit the SAR and it's his ID that is needed.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@tired mommy x

 

Agree with Ethel, that the answer to question may be closer to home.

 

Yes there is a small amount of identity theft I.e. taking out Insurance in anothers persons name, just to get temporary insurance showing on records, with no intention of paying. But this issue is tiny compared to people who arrange Insurance and realise that they cannot afford repayments. And when they try to cancel the cancellation fee is also unaffordable.

 

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi. Apologies for the delay in coming back to you all and thanks for the info you have given.  I have had no response from the SAR's I sent out other than the one asking for ID, which I have supplied.

 

U Drive Cover Limited are now sending letters as attachments in emails advising the cancellation fee is £262.02.  They are sending text messages with the same information. 

 

Haven (which I was advised was the insurer) have not responded to the SAR and this was 1 month on the 5th January.

U Drive have not responded to the SAR I sent and this was 1 month on the 5th January.

 

Do I chase them again advising they are 'in breach' or resend them again?

 

TIA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been out of the loop for the moment.

Are you saying that it is 1 month since you satisfied their ID requirement ?

 

What date was that?

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What addresses did you use when you sent the SARs to Haven and UDrive?

 

And you didn't reply to my earlier question asking why you are sending SARs when it is information held by them about your son that is needed. He must make the request for his own information. They cannot give you information about your son.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, all three SAR's were posted on the 5th December.  Haven.  Close Brothers.  UDrive.  Close brothers asked for ID to be sent which I did, but I stupidly did not log when sent.

 

I have had nothing from Haven.  Nothing from UDrive.  My son is receiving emails and text messages asking for the cancellation fee now £262.02 from them.  There is now also a DCA, CRS, which is asking for £379.54 on behalf of U Drive Cover. I cannot respond as I have no idea which is right until they respond to the SAR.  They give a policy number on the email but no registration.  They give the cars description but no cancellation date.  Says the balance is due in accordance with the terms of business which were agreed on the inception of the policy.  Do I SAR them?

 

My son swears he has never set up a new policy with UDrive when the old one expired and would not have done for over £3k as he would not be able to afford it.  Girlfriend has spoken to them several times about payments.  But until I can get a copy of all calls I have no idea what is going on.

 

I am doing all of this with my sons knowledge.  He works all day long and would not know where to start.  His car is registered at my address and I type the letters and he signs them (obviously not with his real signature).  He does live here sometimes but also stays at his girlfriends house.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I used my address.  My son lives here most of the time.  The policy was taken out at this address and the vehicle is registered her.

 

I stupidly didn't send them recorded, I cant even remember if I sent them Recorded, signed for.

 

Do I send them all again to be sure?  Do I copy in the debt collection agency?

Link to post
Share on other sites

We seem to be at cross purposes here @tired mommy x

 

I'm asking what address for Haven did you use, where did you send the SAR to? And the same question for UDrive.

 

If neither have responded and you have nothing to confirm they have received your SAR then there's no point in resending the SAR unless you are certain you are sending it to the right place.

 

So what was the actual address you posted the SARs to?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...