Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • We need to see the actual document from the IAS where it is written - "The Operator's evidence shows no payment for the Appellant's vehicle, or anything similar. It does show two payments for the same registration in quick succession. I would take a reasonable guess, based on the circumstances described, that the person paying has paid for the registration of the person they assisted again." You can't just type it up yourself. At the hearing in July or August or whenever the judge will have two Witness Statements. One from Bank's director says you never made a second appeal. You say you did make a second appeal and the IAS concluded that payment was made. The judge will immediately twig that either you or the director is lying.  But who? Fail to show the documentation form the IAS and instead just produce something you've typed yourself will make it look like you just made up the appeal and you are lying and you will lose the case. Please let us see what the IAS adjudicator sent.
    • I used to have a retail outlet in London selling my husband's photography.  We also had a co-op with staff so they weren't directly employed by me, but I paid for the other overheads etc.  When my husband died, I carried on as usual for a while but then I became ill and moved quite far away so logistically was becoming very difficult.  I came to an arrangement (verbal) with one of the guys I trusted, that I would send him the images to print and sell as normal, and I wouldn't take any money, as a short term solution until I got back on my feet and worked out the best way to do things. He would pay all the  rent, insurance etc... Over a year later, not able to give things away for free anymore,  I drew up a contract as a wholesale agreement, so I would get everything printed and sent to him and I would invoice his for what he ordered. I noticed form the beginning that he wasn't ordering enough or frequently enough to be making any money, and was suspicious he was doing his own orders on the sly and ordering just enough from me to keep my happy.  I checked with my printer, which I've been with for 20 years, and he sad he wasn't getting orders for my images from anyone else. I emailed a few other printers to ask them to keep a look out for some images but I soon realised this would be impossible to police.  The only option really would be to buy a print from him and check the stamp on the back of it.  I finally managed to get hold of on the prints on sale, and sure enough, he did not order it through me.   In the contract he signed in 2022 it explicitly states that he must destroy all files I had previously sent him etc etc so e is in breach of that.  When I drew up the contract, I was careful to make sure it was legally binding, but before I let rip at him, I need to know where I stand.  The contract is here: PARTIES This WHOLESALE AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made effective as of 30th June, 2022, by and between ############################## The Supplier and the Client, collectively referred to as the "Parties," hereby agree to the following terms: TERMS AND CONDITIONS SALES OF GOODS The Supplier agrees to provide the following goods to the Client (“Goods”): Description of Goods ################################# Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b BOTH PARTIES AGREE: The Client purchases the Goods through the Supplier directly, and agrees to delete/destroy any previously held digital images (Goods) owned by the Supplier, and agrees not to use any such files for monetary gain, outside of this agreement, either directly or through a third party from immediate effect of this agreement. The Client purchases the other materials necessary for resale of the Goods independently of this agreement. The Client shall have exclusive rights for resale of Goods at ###########, and also with permission, as a retailer of the Goods elsewhere, provided that there is no conflict of interest between the Supplier and the Client. The Client is free to decide their own retail prices, for the Goods. The Supplier shall use #####  to provide the printed Goods on Fujifilm Crystal Archive paper, with Lustre finish, and will not use any other Printer unless #### cease to trade, without prior approval from the Client. The Supplier shall not impose restrictions on size or frequency of orders made by the Client. The prices provided by the Supplier shall not increase for a minimum of 3 years, unless the prices of the raw materials rise, in which case the client will be informed immediately. Any discounts/promotional prices of raw materials shall be passed on to the Client by the Supplier, and the invoice will show adjustments for this, as well as credit for return postage of any damaged goods. This agreement can be terminated by the Client without notice; the Supplier must give notice of no less than 90 days, unless the terms of the agreement are breached, in which case, the agreement can be terminated with immediate effect. PAYMENT Orders must be paid for upon receipt of invoice, via Bank transfer: ######### Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b DELIVERY AND INSPECTIONS All orders received by 12.00am (midnight) shall be processed by the Supplier the following working day and delivery of order shall arrive in accordance with the Royal Mail schedule, or DPD, should express delivery be requested. The Client shall be liable for the delivery charge which shall be added to the invoice. The Goods will be delivered to the address specified by the Client. The Client shall be provided with order tracking, and should any problems arise with the ordering system or the couriers (Royal Mail, DPD), the Client shall be informed without delay of any such issues. The Client will inspect the Goods and report any defects or damage to the Goods in transit as soon as possible upon receipt of Goods, and will retain damaged Goods for return to Supplier for refund/replacement. GENERAL PROVISIONS CONFIDENTIALITY The prices of the Goods and other information contained in this Agreement is confidential and will not be disclosed by either party unless with prior written consent of the other party. INDEMNIFICATION The Client indemnifies the Supplier from any claims, liabilities, and expenses made by any third party vendors or customers of the Client. GOVERNING LAW This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with UK Law. ACCEPTANCE Both parties understand and accept the wholesale arrangement stipulated under this Agreement. Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the Parties has executed this Wholesale Agreement as of the day and year set forth above.   Signed by us both electronically.   I haven't broached any of this yet, and I am looking for some advice about what action to take.  The main issue I've got is that he has still go those images.  If I terminate the contract, I will need to know that he no longer has those images and I can't think of a bulletproof way to do this. I'm thinking I might tell him I will continue with the contract but ask for a  sum in damages and say that if I find out he's still doing it down the line I will terminate the contract and sue him for damages. The damages side of things I'm not sure how it would work as he is self employed, and I'm positive he doesn't declare all of his earnings to HMRC, in order to find out how much I have lost, would the court demand to go through his tax self assessments?  I'm not sure how to proceed with this, I don't want to lose that place as an outlet as it is in a prime spot in London, which is why I let him have those images in the first place as I would have had to pull out altogether at that point.  I am regretting it somewhat now though.  Please help.
    • I cannot locate anything in my paper work that states 2 payments were made? Perhaps you could point this out? In reply from IAS it states "The ticketing data has been attached" nothing was sent to me. I made a response to the IAS all this was done online
    • Thanks again for your responses. The concern I have here, is that freeholder of the land (a company, who presumably would have been the ones to have initially instructed PPM to manage the parking here), will have proof of exactly how long the vehicle was on site for, as the driver was meeting operatives from that company on a separate matter. On this basis, if the matter was to get to court, I feel all the other technicalities about signage, size of signage/font, lack of start/finish times, will not be enough to have any case dropped? This PCN was brought up to the freeholder but they have advised that PPM will not waive this charge. 
  • 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

Hairychris21 Vs CoOp bank PPI (reidnet Thankyou!)


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6284 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

Firstly I'd like to say thanks to reidnet, who if he hadn't of made public his successes in the PPI arena, I wouldn't have thought this worth trying.

 

Why we're claiming: A fairly common story; My other half tok out a small overdraft consolidation loan of £3k a couple of years ago. Talking to her about it fairly recently, it turns out that she was given the distinct impression that she would not be able to have the loan unless she took out PPI. She's in a stable public sector job with excellent sickness benifits and no real danger of ever beeing made redundant...

 

This is a clear case of miss selling I guess. However, Do we need to prove it? because that would be nigh on impossible; hust my other halfs word against theirs...

 

I sent off the preliminary complaint, (a modified reidnet special, thanks again) stating the case clearly, and got back a fairly standard letter saying sorry you're unhappy... should have checked the small print... it would have been explained at the time etc. tough s**t basically.

 

What now? Our complaint remains the same, do I just write back restating it and ask for it to be escalated? or Do I send an LBA kind of a thing?

 

reidnet, where's that thread about your lloyds PPI success gone mate, and will it be coming back, your letters were an excellent resource!

 

Thanks for any help or advice forthcoming, HC

Cynical? Realistic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chris,

Im sure I answered this in the PM's..But the past few days have been a bit frantic..lol along with having a new puppy here too I could do with an extra pair of eyes on the back of my head.

 

I would send LBA to them and see what response you get to that,

 

For the Time being My Lloyds thread will not be comming back ( Long story..lol ) But as soon as I have time I will transpose some of the letters as templates.

 

Ian

Lloyds TSB -PPI - Full refund . 05/09/06 :D:p (As Seen on TV) :p

Halifax settled in Full.. :D 22/09/06

TSB First Claim SETTLED IN FULL 19/10/06 :D

Second Claim to Lloyds TSB - Settled in Full

Firstplus - early settlement interest charges - Challenged the use of the rule of 78 - SETTLED IN FULL 12/1/07

PPI - GE Money / Purpleloans / Firstplus - Now Settled after 1 year long hard fight.

 

 

 

If my post has helped you, please click the scales! :grin:

 

Anything said is my opinion and how I understand the law, always consult professional legal advice before taking something to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ian, yes you did cover that ground in the PM, but I'd posted this before I PM'd you! lol

 

Just thought I'd post my second letter to co-operative bank, its not quite an LBA because I want to exhaust their 'internal Complaints Procedure' before i go the MCOL route. Many thanks to Reidnet who's LBA this is a modified version of:

 

Dear Sir or Madam,

 

I am writing to request that my complaint be escalated in line with the Bank’s internal complaint procedure. I am very unhappy at your initial response to my communications with yourselves, as I feel strongly that I have been mis-sold PPP, and that you have no concern whatsoever at this.

 

As stated in my previous correspondence dated 1st February 2007, this policy was mis-sold to me by a member of your staff at a time when I was in financial difficulties, and I was pressurised to take the policy on the understanding that otherwise the loan would not be approved.

 

My request is for the refund of the whole policy cost of £524.85 plus interest of £128.59 making a total of £653.44. Over the period of the loan the policy will have cost me £653.44. I will continue to pay the loan at the agreed monthly figure until the end of its term.

 

This policy was sold in a deceitful manner by a member of your staff and this matter has also been discussed with the FSA and a complaint form has been filled out for the Financial Ombudsman Service.

 

I would like to bring to your attention the FSA principles of ‘Treating customers fairly – towards fair outcomes for consumers’.

 

Principle 7 “A Firm must pay due regard to the information needs of its clients, and communicate information to them in a way which is clear, fair and not misleading”.

 

Principle 9 “A firm must take reasonable care to ensure the suitability of its advice and discretionary decisions for any customer who is entitled to rely upon its judgment”.

 

I would also draw your attention to the terms of the contract which you agreed to at the time that I opened my account. It is an implied term of that contract that you would conduct yourselves lawfully and in a manner which complies with UK law.

 

I feel that in relation to the above points, your bank has been sorely lacking in this instance.

 

I require a refund in the form of a cheque for the sum of £653.44

 

I require repayment in full of this money and if I do not receive this refund within 14 days I will be submitting the completed complaint form regarding this matter to the Financial Ombudsman Service forthwith.

 

Shortly afterwards I will also be considering bringing a claim for the stated amount in my local county court.

 

 

 

 

Yours faithfully,

 

Hairychris21 xxx

 

 

What do you think?

 

I sent it recorded delivery as well, have learnt from previous experience that troublesome correspondence that isn't sent this way may often get filed in the small round cabinet...

Cynical? Realistic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chris,

Nice letter..lol Lets se what they say to that one.. I still have had no word from GE , I have been away in London this week and Just arrived back. I am on Holidays next week and will start on GE,s Solicitor on Monday..lol

 

Ian

Lloyds TSB -PPI - Full refund . 05/09/06 :D:p (As Seen on TV) :p

Halifax settled in Full.. :D 22/09/06

TSB First Claim SETTLED IN FULL 19/10/06 :D

Second Claim to Lloyds TSB - Settled in Full

Firstplus - early settlement interest charges - Challenged the use of the rule of 78 - SETTLED IN FULL 12/1/07

PPI - GE Money / Purpleloans / Firstplus - Now Settled after 1 year long hard fight.

 

 

 

If my post has helped you, please click the scales! :grin:

 

Anything said is my opinion and how I understand the law, always consult professional legal advice before taking something to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Had a reply to my last letter, basically sticking to their guns. They state:

 

'The (diclosure) script that would have been read out to you states that 'we recommend that you take optional protection to cover you against accident, sickness and unemployment''

 

and:

 

'I must advise you that no refund will be given as the Bank has acted appropriately and in accordance with regulations set by the FSA'

 

My other half has no memory of anyone saying the above 'script' to her, and vividly recalls being led to believe that her loan application would not have been accepted if she had not accepted the PPI.

 

I'm going to write to them and ask for evidence that what they say should happen actually did happen in her case.

Cynical? Realistic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a reply to my last letter, basically sticking to their guns. They state:

 

'The (diclosure) script that would have been read out to you states that 'we recommend that you take optional protection to cover you against accident, sickness and unemployment''

 

and:

 

'I must advise you that no refund will be given as the Bank has acted appropriately and in accordance with regulations set by the FSA'

 

My other half has no memory of anyone saying the above 'script' to her, and vividly recalls being led to believe that her loan application would not have been accepted if she had not accepted the PPI.

 

I'm going to write to them and ask for evidence that what they say should happen actually did happen in her case.

 

Hello,

 

TheFsa is undertaking investigations regarding the ppi market

 

This PPI enforcement action follows the publication of the FSA's latest work into the PPI market last week which found that sellers are still not treating customers fairly. The key findings included:

  • Firms are not giving customers clear information during the sales conversation;
  • Customers are still not being made fully aware that there may be parts of the policy under which they cannot claim; and
  • Where customers are sold single premium policies, this is not always done with the best interests of the customer in mind.

MMMMmmm!!!!!!!

 

They are also currently fining companies and I do believe they are only the tip of the iceberg. When someone came up with the idea of rip-off ppi. they all jumped on the wagon. Just watch this space over the next few months.

 

Have a look at the FSA Website it does make good reading.

 

These companies have to deny it was mis-sold, because if they admit it. They will open the flood gates.

If any of my posts are helpful, please feel free to click my scales. All information is given as my opinion only, based on my own personal experiences. I have no legal training, but have educated myself in aspects of consumer legislation. My motto "NEVER GIVE IN, NEVER SURRENDER", THERE IS A WAR ON YOU KNOW

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...