Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
    • quite honestly id email shiply CEO with that crime ref number and state you will be taking this to court, for the full sum of your losses, if it is not resolved ASAP. should that be necessary then i WILL be naming Shiply as the defendant. this can be avoided should the information upon whom the courier was and their current new company contact details, as the present is simply LONDON VIRTUAL OFFICES  is a company registered there and there's a bunch of other invisible companies so clearly just a mail address   
    • If it doesn’t sell easily : what they can get at an auction becomes fair market price, which may not realise what you are hoping.
    • Thank you. The receiver issue is a rabbit hole I don't think I'm going to enjoy going down. These people seem so protected. And I don't understand how or why?  Fair market value seems to be ever shifting and contentious.
  • 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

Firstplus - borrowed £50k/repaid £52k 3yrs later


James31
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4741 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

Ours was fro £53000 and if they used the incorrect calculation and the settlement figure shoudl eb less then we would be happy bunnies as I will also be claiming compensation fro stress etc. We now need to prove that their calculation was not fair I guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OFT already says that the use of rule of 78 in settlements for such loans is open to challenge. I know of two members on here that have been successful. I've pvt messages both for more info but neither have replied.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OFT already says that the use of rule of 78 in settlements for such loans is open to challenge. I know of two members on here that have been successful. I've pvt messages both for more info but neither have replied.

 

It is possible that they have been sworn to secrecy to avoid mass pay outs by some unscrupulous lenders. Perhaps with the help of other members we can formulate a plan to challenge the rule without involving ourselves in too much cost.

If doing a plan of action, would our first step be querying the legalties direct with OFT or would we have use consumer direct? I would really love to nail FP!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi James, any info on this would be appreciated when you are able to post.

 

Also, I am a member of the First Plus Complaints Group and it's members have been of great help to me. Anyone who hasn't already heard of them take a look. Everyone in the group has been adversly affected by First Plus and have banded together to try and gain recompense.

 

Regards, Lush.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 3 months later...

Hi all this is my first post. I have been fighting FP for approx 3 yrs now and got nowhere. Claims management firms are useless they have no clout at all so decided to do it myself. I took out first loan in 2000 £28000 plus £7000 ppi topped up in 2001 £38000 plus £7700 ppi. FPat the time were not regulated until nov 2001 so there is nothing i can do about this. On the other hand when i settled my loan in may 2005 they charged me £52000 for the privilege using rule of 78. OFT guidelines clearly states that they cannot use this method on unregulated loans over £25000 for various reasons. My complaint is now with a FOS adjudicator who i have spoken to recently and she has been very possitive that they will rule in my favour. Could i please urge anyone who has a grievence against FP to not give up and take them all the way. Regarding the PPI i am now looking at legal action as they are bang out of order and i wont stop until i get justice. If anyone would like help regarding these people dont hesitate to contact me as i would do all i can. Will also let you know how FOS rules

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
  • 3 months later...
Hi all this is my first post. I have been fighting FP for approx 3 yrs now and got nowhere. Claims management firms are useless they have no clout at all so decided to do it myself. I took out first loan in 2000 £28000 plus £7000 ppi topped up in 2001 £38000 plus £7700 ppi. FPat the time were not regulated until nov 2001 so there is nothing i can do about this. On the other hand when i settled my loan in may 2005 they charged me £52000 for the privilege using rule of 78. OFT guidelines clearly states that they cannot use this method on unregulated loans over £25000 for various reasons. My complaint is now with a FOS adjudicator who i have spoken to recently and she has been very possitive that they will rule in my favour. Could i please urge anyone who has a grievence against FP to not give up and take them all the way. Regarding the PPI i am now looking at legal action as they are bang out of order and i wont stop until i get justice. If anyone would like help regarding these people dont hesitate to contact me as i would do all i can. Will also let you know how FOS rules

 

Firstly, you cannot claim for PPI, it is impossible through the normal channels so dont even waste your time. Even with the latest FSA policy statement they have made it clear that you cannot claim for pre reg sales i.e. Jan 2004. The FSA nor FOS have absolutely no jurisdiction over sales prior to then

 

You would only be able to even attampt to claim via court using an "unfair relationship" and for that you would need legal help, and you definitely would need no win no fee and you would definitely need insurance in case it all went tits up!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Currently disputing interest rates with Barclays/FP, had reply from OFT, other customers of FP are chasing them also. The main point being that though interest rates are at their lowest for years, FP have not followed suit and if the rates go up FP will probably increase them also.

Don\'t let the B**tards grind you down

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...

I see Barclays along with others are being taken to court for manipulation of the LIBOR rate, the rate used to calculate the inetrest you pay on various loans.

This could have an effect on the FP rates.

Don\'t let the B**tards grind you down

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...