Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

New member ready for war with First Direct and Nationwide....


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6260 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

Hello,

I'm new to all of this and glad to have found a forum to discuss issues relating to bank charges.

 

To cut a long story short, my partner and I have incurred heavy bank charges for years (as far back as I can remember). These charges, as you probably can guess, have been unfair, unsubstantiated and forced us into more debt.

 

Clearly, we are responsible to a large extent for going overdrawn or over borrowing - however that doesnt give the banks license to penalise us and make matters worst. We were with First Direct for 5 years (still are but not as a main account now) and have been with Nationwide for 1 year (as our main account provider). We've incurred £1,400 of charges from First Direct (and that's without adding interest) so I've issued a letter to them requesting this back using the template from the BBC website. They've got another couple of days before I go through the small claims court.

 

After I've done First Direct, I'll target Nationwide....when my parachute account opens next week!

 

I've heard that I should go to the ombudsman first before small claims court - appreciate any thoughts on this!

 

Anyway, thanks for listening and I look forward to reading the numerous threads on this forum.

 

Best

BB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BB - welcome on board! Advice on CAG is to go through the process of sending preliminary letter asking for charges back, wait 14 days then send LBA (letter before action), wait 14 days and - if the bank have not responded/refunded your charges - stick to the timetable and file your claim at court and add 8% (s69) interest to your schedule of charges. Haven't seen any advice that says to go to the ombudsman unless you're complaining about retaliation from the banks (e.g., account closed 'cos you're reclaiming charges).

 

It's probably really worthwhile starting your own threads in the Nationwide and first direct forums (at least i think there's one for first direct??!) You'll find loads of support, encouragement and advice from other CAG members going through exactly what you are right now. Good luck with your claims, Hedgey ;)

Can't find what you're looking for? Please have a look at Michael Browne's

A-Z Guide

*** PLEASE NOTE ***

I do not answer queries via PM. If you send me a PM, please include a link to your thread - any advice I am able to offer will be on your thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi hedgey06,

Many thanks for the advice - will give them the LBA and slap on the 8% :) before going to court.

 

I've just checked my Nationwide account and noticed that they've just slapped on £160 charges for returned direct debits and excess overdraft fees. So looking forward to claiming that back too (along with the £60-100 per month they been charging since Nov '06).

 

Just hope they both dont cancel the loans I have with them! :(

 

BB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice one BB........ keep the ball rolling!!!

 

They shouldn't touch your loan accounts - especially if you're up to date with all your payments. If they do try and call them this would be classed as retaliation, so you'd have a valid complaint to the financial ombudsman there.

 

Good luck - Hedgey x :-D

Can't find what you're looking for? Please have a look at Michael Browne's

A-Z Guide

*** PLEASE NOTE ***

I do not answer queries via PM. If you send me a PM, please include a link to your thread - any advice I am able to offer will be on your thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ombudsman won't deal with complaints which are also being dealt with by the courts.

I expect that this is to save the Ombudsman the embarrassment of arriving at a contrary conclusion to the court.

 

If you go through the Ombudsman it will take you 3 - 4 months and you will get no interest on the money.

Also, your complaint will go silent and you will have no idea of what is happening until the decision is made or else the claim is settled.

 

Go through the courts and it is active, you get interest and you will feel as if you are finally taking charge and bullying the bully.

It will give you confidence to deal with other consumer-related complaints

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks for the advice Bankfodder.

 

In fact, this morning I received a 'Without Prejudice' letter from First Direct offering a refund just shy of £1,000, £400 less than what we asked for and it included an additional £185 charges they've added this month. If we accept it, we must sign and send it back within 10 working days. The bank's defence of the charges was as follows:

 

'In circumstances where you have authorised a payment that would, if met by us, lead to your account going overdrawn or to exceed an agreed overdraft limit, we have to consider whether to make this payment. A fee is payable for this service provided by the bank, details of which are clearly set out in our published tariff. The circumstances in which the fee will apply are clearly set out in our Account Terms and Conditions, a copy of which was provided to you when you opened your account. We are confident to our position and believe that if your claim for a refund proceeded to Court, we would successfully resist any legal challenge in relation to these fees'

 

But I believe they're bluffing and would normally take up the challenge. However, I need to access that cash quickly before I start other action which may have them reclaim it.

 

BB

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...