Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • thought your story rang a bell. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/416315-knightsbridgecreditfix-iva-treated-me-very-badly-thinking-of-bk-now-help/ you vanished and never cameback. dx  
    • and it legally informs them of your correct and current address as you must do with all old debts last paid/used in say 7 yrs you dont want backdoor CCJ's. what were the names of these IVA scammers, the one you took it out with, and the one that scammed you to let them take over please? your story is slightly worrying. dx  
    • Incidentally, congratulations on not buying the warranty. That is another Big Motoring World rip-off. See what we have to say about extended warranties and the Big Motoring World attitude to them is particularly unhelpful
    • well that google is from 2019, but the photos are certainly of someone driving on the public highway in/out by an ANP system, though the site of where the camera actually is, is not showing there are anpr cameras up by the low yellow barriers but they wont get from facing shots from there. interesting, needs to be checked if the road IS a public highway but on private land, cause as you say, if the whole area is max 4hrs , how does the hotel work< ?? must have a reg entry system.  now as for taking pictures of cars on a public highway then guessing the are parking ...erm.... i dont thnk thats right nor allowed under GDPR. dx  
    • Under the consumer rights act 2015, if a defect manifests itself within 30 days and you have a right to return the vehicle for a full refund. If any defect manifests itself within the first six months of ownership then you have a right to return the vehicle for a full refund subject to the retailers right to carry out a repair. If the retailer declines to repair or if the repair fails then you have the right to return. The problem here is that you have to assert their right. It's a bit ridiculous – but you have to do let them know preferably in writing that you are asserting your rights under the consumer rights act either the 30 day right or the six month right. I suppose that you haven't done this – which would be quite understandable because most people don't know that these rights exist and that they are subject to these conditions – the condition that the right must be inserted. It is frankly ridiculous. The dealers know it and we have lots of instances of this company delaying appointments et cetera and our strong suspicion is that they are simply trying to run their customers out of time. On the basis that you haven't asserted your rights, we now have to look to ordinary contract law. You are entitled to purchase a vehicle which is of satisfactory condition and which remains that way for a reasonable period of time. Clearly it is in satisfactory. They are blaming you. Has your independent inspection identified the reason for the defect? This will be important because as you have seen BMW are already saying it is down to your driving and you are going to have to produce evidence that it wasn't down to your driving and the you drove it absolutely reasonably and it was simply the condition of the car. Have you been without the car for any period of time. Is it driveable now? If the car was off the road for a substantial amount of time and was still off the road then you would be able to argue that this is a fundamental breach of contract and that you have been deprived of substantially the whole benefit of the contract and therefore you will be entitled to treat the contract as breached by Big Motoring World and insist on cancelling the contract. It may be that you will eventually be obliged to keep the car but have the repairs paid for. Have you had any quotations for the work that needs doing? I asked you questions about the MOT – but you haven't responded.
  • 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 
        • 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

Omega 3 v. NatWest


Omega 3
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6573 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

Have issued claim using MCOL against NatWest so they have 14 days to act. Have also sent strongly worded letter of complaint to NatWest about their habit of sending my confidential bank statements in tatty brown envelopes with holes in them!

 

Visited HSBC today to open a parachute account and they wouldn't do so unless I changed my salary deposit from NatWest to HSBC. I said 'yes',as long as you can give me the sam eoverdraft facility as NatWest to which they said no!' Are all these banks tarred with the same brush by any chance???!!!!:|

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, I ended up going to Alliance & Leicester who my mortgage is with. I don't get any interest but atleast it's a safe haven!

 

Is it worth complaining to the information commissioner about the tatty envelope situation or is that not appropriate?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Lueeze

I dont know if its really worth it TBH, Its wrong but htey could blame it on royal mail...now if it had been opened then yes i would, or if it was sent to the wrong address then i would be crazy with anger, but Im not sure if its even worth it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont know if its really worth it TBH, Its wrong but htey could blame it on royal mail...now if it had been opened then yes i would, or if it was sent to the wrong address then i would be crazy with anger, but Im not sure if its even worth it...

 

They appear to be purposely damaged in my opinion. I'll post my pics later of my own envelope and how damaged it was, they're certainly not of the same grade as their standard envelopes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, MCOL has been acknowledged by NatWest giving them 28 days to respond. My DPA request resulted in only statements being sent to me so I wrote to Stuart Higley requesting confirmation that there had not been any manual interventions on my accounts over the past 6 years.

 

This is the response I received this morning:

 

"Thank you for your letter of 14 may 2006.

 

Hopefully the missing statements will be with you soon, if they are not already to hand.

 

In the majority of cases charges are triggered automatically when an irregular situation is handled but if manual intervention took place, the action taken would not be noted as a matter of routine. Therefore, no record exists against which I can refer.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Stuart Higley

Customer Relations"

 

Is this an admission that charges are applied automatically by computer? Does this also mean that they have ignored by DPA disclosure request by stating they have no records about me?

 

Comments and advice most welcome!:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It most certainly sounds like it. Hope I get one the same!

NatWest-

Data Protection Act Request sent 12/04 (Statements arrived 09/06/06!!!!!!!!!)

Parachute Account Created 25/04

Preliminary Letter Sent 09/06/06 reply received 14/06/06

LBA Sent 14/06/06 reply received 20/06/06

Moneyclaim request issued 27/06/06

Defence arrived 29/07/06

Offer of 50% from Cobbetts 03/08/06

Settled in full 23/08/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the majority of cases charges are triggered automatically when an irregular situation is handled but if manual intervention took place, the action taken would not be noted as a matter of routine. Therefore, no record exists against which I can refer.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Stuart Higley

Customer Relations"

 

Is this an admission that charges are applied automatically by computer? Does this also mean that they have ignored by DPA disclosure request by stating they have no records about me?

 

Comments and advice most welcome!:)

 

1) They have admitted their charges are automated.

 

2) They have told you (and therefore everyone else here) that they don't bother keeping records of manual intervention.

 

This isn't a breach of the DPA - they can't supply informaiton they don't have - but it does mean they can't prove that any manual intervention has ever taken place. So basically they can only ever lawfully charge you for the automated processing. Which is virtually nothing.

If you found this post useful please click on the scales above.

 

Egg - £400 - Prelim sent. On hold.

Mint - On the list Est £800

GE Capital - On the list (3 accounts!) Est £4000

 

MBNA - £545 Prelim sent 13/11/2006

LBA sent 1/12/2006

£350 partial payment received 18/12/2006.

Full settlement received 20/1/07

 

NatWest - Est £4000 not incl interest

Data Protection Act Sent 10/1/07

Statements received 24/1/07

Prelim sent 3/2/07

Full Settlement received 22/2/07

 

The contents of this post are the sole opinions of The Cornflake and not necessarily the opinions of any other members of this group. They do not constitute sound legal or financial advice and if in doubt you are advised to seek advice from a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought as much, I couldnt believe my eyes when I read what was written there. Been in touch with the information comissioners office today who were a bit vague but explained to me how to complain about Nat West failing to disclose information.

 

Thanks for all the great advice!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that I have a letter from Nat West customer relations stating that account charges are applied automatically is it worth writing to RBS (who are defending my claim) to let them know that I have this admission? Is this likely to make them settle? They have acknowledged my claim and have until 4th June to enter a defence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On occasions when I have exceeded my overdraft limit due to a direct debit the people at NatWest have charged me £38 for a referral fee, however they have paid the DD. I am right in thinking that I can claim these charges back aren't I?:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Defence and request for further information received today from Cobbetts.

 

They are requetsing information about the accounts and the charges. Can I add recent charges to the total amount, that is charges which have been applied since I started a claim against them?

 

They go on to ask if the charges were a result of a breach of contract on my part. What should I answer to this? They then go on to ask me to identify the particular breach of contract (by reference to appropriate terms of the contract) that the charges related to.

 

The final tricky one is "Please specify all of the facts relied on by the claimant in support of the contentions in paragraph 5 above, an din particular please identify the contractual provisions that the Claimant alleges are unenforcable by reference to UCTA/the regulations."

 

Is all this pretty standard? And is it wise to issue my own CPR18 request when I writ eback to them?

 

Any advice and comments very welcome!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is what they've sent you a CPR18 request?

 

If so it is not applicable to the Small Claims Track and so does not need to be answered. I would respond to them advising them of this.

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

If you Google it you should get a good link to a copy in the first few results. If one doesn't work try the Cached link.

If you found this post useful please click on the scales above.

 

Egg - £400 - Prelim sent. On hold.

Mint - On the list Est £800

GE Capital - On the list (3 accounts!) Est £4000

 

MBNA - £545 Prelim sent 13/11/2006

LBA sent 1/12/2006

£350 partial payment received 18/12/2006.

Full settlement received 20/1/07

 

NatWest - Est £4000 not incl interest

Data Protection Act Sent 10/1/07

Statements received 24/1/07

Prelim sent 3/2/07

Full Settlement received 22/2/07

 

The contents of this post are the sole opinions of The Cornflake and not necessarily the opinions of any other members of this group. They do not constitute sound legal or financial advice and if in doubt you are advised to seek advice from a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 10 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 6573 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...