Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Your page numbers should run through your WX and exhibits so im concerned its page x of 9.
    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • UK travellers have been turned away at airports because their passports are not valid for EU travel.View the full article
    • i think theres been MORE than amble evidence of that and am astonished that criminal proceedings haven't begun.
    • Yep, those 'requirements' not met to shareholders satisfaction seem to me to be: 1. Not being allowed to increase customer bills by 40% (of which well over 50% of the new total would NOT be investment) 2. 1 plus regulators not agreeing to letting them do 'things in their own time (ie carry on regardless)
  • 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
      • 160 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

Marbles


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6152 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

My first post, so I hope I am in the right forum!

 

I have had a Marbles card for 5 years and decided to claim back the charges they have made during this period. Sent the standard request off to them 5 weeks ago and didn't receive a reply, so I called them this evening.

 

Firstly, the operator was adamant that I had to pay £5 per copy of a statement - despite me stating that the maximum they could charge was £10 for the full 5 years. I then spoke to a "supervisor", who said that the charge is £10 per year...after reiterating the data protection act to them I finally managed to get the full 5 years for £10!

 

Secondly, and the this is the main reason for my post, they informed me that the credit card was on permanent block. This is due to several monthly repayments being made a few weeks late last year (the past 4 repayments have all been made on time). This shocked me because I have not received any correspondence from them - be it in writing or over the phone and they have not issued a default on the account (checked my credit report).

 

Can they simply do this? They refuse to put anything in writing confirming what they said, so I am just taking their call centres word for it. Don't they usually default an account prior to this?

 

They are happy to continue receiving the monthly minimum repayment off of me and collecting the interest each month. As they have effectively stopped the use of my card now, do you think I can ask for them to freeze the interest?

 

Thanks for your help.

 

Robert

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are happy to continue receiving the monthly minimum repayment off of me and collecting the interest each month. As they have effectively stopped the use of my card now, do you think I can ask for them to freeze the interest?

 

Thanks for your help.

 

Robert

 

 

From the above bit of your post, Marbles is HFC Bank, and from my own dealings with them they'll happily keep taking your minimum payments whilst you're not actually in default and they'll keep adding interest to! They were one of the most unhelpful bunches I dealt with, don't want to know, don't want to write, ie just keep sending us money each month! They won't stop the interest until you default and it's only then that they have to.

 

Don't give up on the charges!

 

Good luck & Welcome to the forums :)

 

Dave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the above bit of your post, Marbles is HFC Bank, and from my own dealings with them they'll happily keep taking your minimum payments whilst you're not actually in default and they'll keep adding interest to! They were one of the most unhelpful bunches I dealt with, don't want to know, don't want to write, ie just keep sending us money each month! They won't stop the interest until you default and it's only then that they have to.

 

Don't give up on the charges!

 

Good luck & Welcome to the forums :)

 

Dave.

 

 

They froze my interest straight away. I requested it (in writing) and they did it with no problems... and they also refunded £75 worth of charges without me asking !!

 

My only gripe with them is that although they continue to accept my minimum payment, every 3 months I get a string of phone calls and texts (since my daughter slipped up and gave them my mobile :mad: ) pressurising me into an extra £30 or so to stop them from passing the account to a DCA.

 

I have let this carry on because I hadn't discovered the CAG !! Having now discovered this wonderful site and having almost finished dealing with 2 other accounts (successfully so far)... HFC are next on my list !

 

Next time they 'phone, there will be no increases in payment and they can pass it to a DCA if they so choose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is It me or is it really that marbles have lost their marbles ?

CLICK HERE FOR A LOOK AT ALL OF MY FILES: http://s134.photobucket.com/albums/q82/bailiffchaser/

do not forget to click on my scale if i am giving you the right advice or advice is making sense click my scales otherwise others think i am not helping you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

WELL THEY HAVE CERTAINLY LOST THEIR

"EXECUTED AGREEMENTS"

WE HAVE A MOLE IN SLUDGE SLOUGH AND THEY HAVEN'T GOT ANYTHING

REGARDING AGREEMENTS

 

SOME VERY BITTER STAFF THERE

 

ASK YOURSELF HAVE THEY EVER PRODUCED ONE !!!

 

icon10.gif-icon10.gif-icon10.gif-icon10.gif-icon10.gif-icon10.gif

  • Haha 1

:cool: sunbathing in juan les pins de temps en temps

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
WELL THEY HAVE CERTAINLY LOST THEIR

"EXECUTED AGREEMENTS"

WE HAVE A MOLE IN SLUDGE SLOUGH AND THEY HAVEN'T GOT ANYTHING

REGARDING AGREEMENTS

 

SOME VERY BITTER STAFF THERE

 

ASK YOURSELF HAVE THEY EVER PRODUCED ONE !!!

 

icon10.gif-icon10.gif-icon10.gif-

 

IS THIS TRUE??????

I sent a CCA request three months ago, nothing! I have spoken to them and asked again and again for them to send it out, again, nothing. If you have some inside info on this please PM me, I'm about to send them a default letter, many thanks in advance

Bircave:)

9-1-07 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent:o !! Lloyds and Halifax!

20-1-07 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent Capital One

20-1-07 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent Halifax Card Services

20-1-07 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent Marbles

20-1-07 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent Halifax (Birchave0's sis)

8-3-07 PPI refund Lloyds TSB Loan £1200 + £2900 off loan balance

22-5-07 Halifax *Won* £1025

23-9-07 Goldfish 8k balance written off, £2300 PPI + charges returned, no agreement

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...