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 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 162 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

Banks and the Consumer Rights Act 2015


JS3

Recommended Posts

Does anyone have any thoughts on whether a bank's terms of business must be compliant with the Consumer Rights Act 2015?

 

I am in particular looking to see whether a bank can use a policy to exclude itself from liability when it acts of its own volition and causes a customer a loss.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any term in a service contract which has the effect of excluding liability for breaches of the consumer rights act are void

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a feeling that was the case. Here is the story.

 

We went on a jolly to Las Vegas and San Fran in February. On the 2nd day of our break, I was called back to the UK for a family emergency,

 

My flight was non-changeable and non-refundable, so I went straight to departures and bought another one-way ticket to London for £708.

 

When I paid for the ticket, my HSBC card responded: "Do not honour".

 

I tried again a few more times, and they refused my card each time. I knew I have over £6500 balance.

 

While standing at the booking desk, I phoned the bank, and they put me into a call centre queue with piped music for about 25 minutes.

 

Then a voice came over the phone telling me their call centre had closed and reopened at 8 am the next morning. London is an 8 hours’ difference. 

 

I returned to our hotel, and at midnight my time (8 am UK time), I phoned the bank they said there has been a disputed transaction of £55 on my account for an item I sold on Facebook, and they put an inhibition on my account which stoops me making transactions or logging into it.

 

I identified the disputed transaction and the bank call centre agent found the dispute in my favour by the bank over the telephone and released the inhibition.

 

An inhibition is freezing access to my money held by the bank. So an "inhibition" is freezing a bank account in banking terminology.

 

The bank released the freeze on my money and I returned to departures and booked a ticket to London.

 

This time the flight was nearly full, and the fare was an eye-watering £2309.

 

This is a difference of £1601 plus taxi expenses.

 

I made a formal complaint to the bank that it froze my entire balance when only £55 of that balance was in dispute.

 

The bank responded by giving a 31-page document called Personal Banking Terms and Conditions and Charges.

 

At clause 22 of the document, it states: When we aren't responsible for things that go wrong.

 

The document continues by saying:

 

If something goes wrong, please let us know straight away. We’ll try to help if we can. We’ll do all we can to carry out our side of this agreement. But there may be times that we can’t. We’re not responsible for any losses you may have if we aren’t able to carry out our responsibilities under this agreement in circumstances like the ones below.

 

• Where we can’t carry out our responsibilities for legal or regulatory reasons.

 

• Where something’s happened that we couldn’t predict or that isn’t normal. And where it’s outside our (or our agents’ and/or subcontractors’) control, and we couldn’t have avoided it even where we used all of our efforts to. For example, industrial action or mechanical failure.


 

I take this to mean the bank has excluded itself from liability when it acts of its own volition and causes a loss to a customer.

 

When I challenged this with the bank, their response was two-fold.

 

The first argument was that the Consumer Rights Act does not apply to a bank because they are not a "trader" and the relationship between a bank and its customers is that of a principal-agent and a customer that places money on trust with the bank.

 

The Consumer Rights Act 2015, section 61 gives a list of contracts not covered, and a bank and customer contract is not on that list.

 

At section  62(2) it says an unfair contract is not binding on the consumer.

 

I infer this to mean their 31-page policy document does not apply because it excluded the bank from liability when it acts under its own motion causing a loss to the customer.

 

The bank cannot tell me what legislation excludes them from the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

 

I am ready to escalate the complaint, but I'd like to hear some thoughts.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i find it very weird they froze the whole A/C simply over a disputed? facebook sale?

thats not something i've heard of before nor seen any bank do.

 

can you just expand upon that story please.

doesn't sit right with me.

 

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

Freezing of accounts does appear to be a current increasing trend. Spoken to a number of people who have had their accounts frozen or closed recently due to transactions.  The Banks do not appear to want become involved in people online trading, if there have been a number of other similar transactions previously, when the account is personal and not business.

Is there any business related activities going on in this case ?

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

The transaction was for the sale of a computer monitor. I tested the monitor and the buyer accepted and paid.

6 weeks later, the customer complained the monitor was faulty and wanted a refund.

I refused.

The customer made an APP fraud complaint against the transaction.

My bank froze my account without telling me by text phone or by email.

The bank found the £55 dispute in my favour.

There is no business-related activity on the account.

This was a private sale.

I appreciate you taking the time to ask for clarification.

 

My question is a) whether the bank is liable for my losses, and b) whether the bank is exempt from the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

If the answer to b, is "Yes", then can anyone state under what statute provides that exemption?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are referring to the buyer as a customer.

If there are previous sales transactions on a personal Bank account, the Bank may reasonably believe that there are business activities ongoing.  And they may make a decision to close the account. 

In regard to your question, the FCA website has information about CRA applying to financial products, but it is not very clear exactly what protection is offered. 

Generally for most financial products including Bank accounts, as they are regulated by the FCA and people have access to the FOS,  there is separate law that applies.  And this may be a better option than the CRA.

You need to exhaust the Banks complaints process first, by getting them to issue final letter of response. And then you could look to either go to the FOS or issue small Court claim asking for compensation for the amount of loss. 

 

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

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...