Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6254 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 OH had an MBNA credit card which was defaulted some just over 2 years ago; since then she has been in a debt management plan arranged by CCCS. Recently PPI premiums had started to appear on statements. With CCCS' agreement, I drafted a letter stating that my OH had no knowledge of asking for PPI, did not want it and asking for a refund of all premiums. We asked that MBNA produce proof that she had asked for PPI if they thought she had. MBNA replied stating that she had requested PPI from the outset, that the premium had been shown on every statement (this is simply incorrect as to fact), but that they had now cancelled the PPI. They refuse to refund anything, and failed to provide proof that PPI had been asked for, though they did send a copy of the standard policy!

 

From this, it seems that the policy is void if an account is in default for more than 90 days.

 

My question is this: Should MBNA have continued to charge premiums, and interest thereon, when the policy was void? Secondly, can a CCA request be used in respect of PPI policies?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rereading MBNA's letter, I find that it refers to an account number which does not relate to OH at all!

 

We have now sent another letter asking them to respond to the original letter, but this time basing their reply upon the correct account.

 

Part of me is hoping that they'll send the same standard letter with the correct account number, so I can then send them copies of 11 statements with no mention of PPI and ask them to explain.

 

I have also now got hold of a copy of the T & Cs for their PPI, and the policy is considered terminated if the cardholder fails to make the minimum payment 4 times.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

An update.

 

We have now sent a SAR to MBNA, and await the result. In the meantime, we wrote to MBNA again challenging the accuracy of their statement that 'PPC premiums were clearly shown on every statement', and enclosing 12 month's worth of statements on which PPC is notable by its absence. We have also asked them to explain how, if no premium is shown, and no money taken, cover was provided as they say it was, and asking again for proof that PPC was requested.

 

They replied with what appears to be simply a modified template letter stating that: PPC was requested at the outset of the account; that the T&Cs 'would have been sent out at the time'; and that cover was provided. They have completely ignored the points we raised about statements and the lapsing of cover when an account is defaulted. However, some 3 months after the original request, they say that they have 'requested a copy of the original application so we can check that our records are correct'. In other words, they aren't sure if what they have written is accurate at all!

 

We have now written to the Customer Advocate Dept at MBNA and given them a final chance to resolve this, or the next communication will be a LBA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ScarletPimpernel

 

It's odd, isn't it, that MBNA terminate the PPI policy if the cardholder fails to make the minimum payment 4 times?

 

I'd have thought that as the agent for the insurance, and as a client of theirs was possibly in difficulty, they'd have given you a quick courtesy call with regard to establishing the circumstances and helping you make a possible claim? ;-) ;-)

 

Clearly they are not on 50%-60% commision for claims work ...

"Weasel (n): any person or group that operates in that vast grey area between good ethical behaviour and the sort of activities that might send you to jail".

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...