Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
  • 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

Tesco Motor Insurance


JWhite
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6034 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

I cancelled my Car Insurance last year and stopped my direct debit, I'm now getting letters from them and a debt collector asking for money as they say they got no letter from me stating that I wanted to cancel so they kept on charging me until now!

 

Now they say that if I don't have a SORN or proof of other insurance the debt still stands, all I have is a photo copy of the original letter I sent (what has the date on).. I've already told them that I wrote to them which they say they didn't receive.

 

My next step is to take legal action as I've had enough of them, so what I bascially would like to know is what is the best route, should I go straight to the courts, their watchdog (which is?) or give them one last chance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a similar problem with Tesco, even though I sent them a cancellation letter they said wasn't required! They attempted to chase me for premium they claim wasn't paid (untrue), one month's premium, and a £75 'cancellation charge'. Eventually, after a farcical exchange of correspondence, in which Tesco sent everything to different incorrect addresses, they put the masterminds at Moorcroft onto it.

 

I disputed the debt with Moorcroft (on the basis that the extra month's premium and cancellation charge are unreasonable penalties), and sent them a CCA for the instalment plan, to which they failed to respond other than with a proforma letter (to the wrong address). Tesco sent me two different printouts of their standard agreement, with different dates and addresses, that did not meet the CCA requirements.

 

I have not heard from either Tesco or Moorcroft since.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand Tesco's stance here. From their point of view you have asked for premium to be refunded for no apparant reason. If they refund you the money, whilst you still have the car, and no other insurance, then they are acting illegally, by aiding you to drive without insurance.

 

They are covering their back. Do you not have this info to send?

Abbey - owed £3260 - Paid up.

 

Barclays owed £2500 - Paid up.

 

Halifax, Mint & Egg - next on the hit list

 

Dont click on the scales - I'm quite proud of my little red dot! - As the little red dot has gone - click away!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless I can drive two cars I find it quite difficult to drive my old Car as I have been riving a Company car since I canceled the insurance.

 

Also presently it is not illegal to own a Car without Car insurance as long as it is privately stored etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK lets try and be a little more productive here, what did you do with the old car? Has it been sold, stored off road etc?

Cahoot - Rejection of offer sent 14/06/07

 

Barclaycard - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 22/03/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its been a long week!:rolleyes:

 

When starting my new job the Car was stored off the road, then when the Tax ran out (It was on HP and I was trying to return it at this time) I declared a SORN which was about two months ago, the Car was returned last week to the Motor company.

 

Tesco are asking for me to pay from roughly June - Oct last year while the car was off road but not declared as SORN due to it being taxed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK that clears things up there.

 

If you havent done so already i would send them a letter enclosing a copy of your original cancellation request letter. One more question - did you return the insurance certificate with this letter and did you state this fact in your cancellation letter?

Cahoot - Rejection of offer sent 14/06/07

 

Barclaycard - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 22/03/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've done everything except send them a copy of the letter as I thought since from their first reponse with it not being a SORN or a new license agreement it wouldn't be much good.

 

I'm at the point where I know I cancelled it, if they wanted to kickup a fuss they should of back then and not just leave it.. This in turn as ust made me dig my heels in

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, a couple of things here ;-

 

1. When you wrote to Tesco, did you enclose the certificate of insurance stating the date the cancellation was to take effect and the reason for this.

2. When did you take out the policy and what date did you ask for it to be cancelled. Was it in the first year of insurance or had it been renewed ?Reason I am asking as that insurers do not always cancel on a pro-rata basis & almost not when in first year. Cancellation is on what's called a short period basis & generally a percentage of the annual premium plus any of these "admin" charges that all are applying. If you let us know the cost & period, I'm sure we can work out for you what "should" be charged.

3. Generally for backdated cancellation, a SORN, bill of sale would normally be required but "off road" would not be acceptable. The insurer would be liable for any Third Party Claim should the vehicle be stolen - This is in the RTA.

 

With the above info though I'm sure us insurance bods will make things clearer for you & help where possible.

:p :p If my advice as been of help, please give me a quick click on the scales to your right ;) ;) :)
Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Yes I did

2. It was coming to the end of the 3rd year

3. I am aware it is not currently illegal to have a Car without insurance if it is stored on private property, this does seem to be their small grasp of getting some money out of me which I will go to court over if required as it would only make me more than happy to hear them say in Court I am falsifying claims of doing this.

 

I have decided that it may be best to write to them one last time with all the paper work I have, if they believe to accept then it will be over, if not at the bottom of the letter I will ask them to take this straight to Court and stop faffing about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok,

 

My view here is that DL should cancel on a pro-rata basis from the date of receipt of the certicicate of motor insurance. It is an accepted rule that pro-rata rates should apply after the first renewal where no claim has been made within the policy year.

 

They may charge an admin fee which in my opinion is unfair in itself but I would ask for a full breakdown of how they arrive at the TOR ( Time on Risk ) charge.

 

One thing to be aware of is commission clawback as Tesco will take a commission from UK Insurance ( back to Direct Line & RBS again !!! ) and they may effectively charge you back the portion of the commission from the annual policy they must repay the Insurer.

 

Do get a full breakdown & post it on here.

:p :p If my advice as been of help, please give me a quick click on the scales to your right ;) ;) :)
Link to post
Share on other sites

Have decided to take peoples tips from this post but will be going through FOS sent the forms off yesterday, even though its not much money on this I will NOT back down as I beleive these sort of placed need to stop thinking just of profits and think more of the people on the other end

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

I wrote on my renewal notice for it to be cancelled as I had been in dispute with them over a very minor accident where they were rude and would not accept a word I said so I lost my no claims bonus.

 

They then sent to me a notice saying that they had cancelled my insurance from the 1st of Oct which I received on the 4th Oct giving me a £15 refund. My renewal date is the 22nd Oct. If I had accepted this I would have been driving illegally for 3 days without knowing it. Who would cancel 3 weeks of insurance and why was I not charged a cancellation fee.

 

Are they just trying to be awkward

Link to post
Share on other sites

All insurance is a con, I have reached this conclusion based on my breif acquaintance with insurance (I'm only in my early 20's). Unfortunatley it is a neccesary evil so all we can do is do our best to make sure they screw us as little as possible.

The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All insurance is a con, I have reached this conclusion based on my breif acquaintance with insurance (I'm only in my early 20's). Unfortunatley it is a neccesary evil so all we can do is do our best to make sure they screw us as little as possible.

 

I don't believe it is true that *all* insurance is a con. For example, the flood victims this year who had insurance would be very grateful that they were covered.

 

Furthermore, there are many insurance workers on this forum who are spending their free time to give advice to you and to others needing help. Why would they do this if they wanted to con you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

All insurance is a con, I have reached this conclusion based on my breif acquaintance with insurance (I'm only in my early 20's). Unfortunatley it is a neccesary evil so all we can do is do our best to make sure they screw us as little as possible.

 

What a load of rubbish, but having read your posts it doesn't come as a surprise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe it is true that *all* insurance is a con. For example, the flood victims this year who had insurance would be very grateful that they were covered.

 

Furthermore, there are many insurance workers on this forum who are spending their free time to give advice to you and to others needing help. Why would they do this if they wanted to con you?

 

 

agreed, I'm one of them, I can assure you it's not part of my job to spend my free time on here!

 

Indebt, I can understand your frustration ( having read your post etc) but please remember the alternative, lets say no body has insurance anymore!! and then you crash into somebodys 50k merc????

 

The problem with insurance is it DOES seem like and expense for nothing, but the day you claim is the day you realise it's worth it! ;)

 

Yes by reading this forum it's easy to think that things go wrong etc all the time but thats not the case. And trust me, when my car got swept away this summer in the Sheffield floods I was very happy to get a chq and my claim sorted within a week!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

"but the day you claim is the day you realise it's worth it"

 

Ok ok saying all is too harsh but insurance companies often display quite breathtaking ability to wriggle out of paying...

 

Insurance is ok when it is straight forward but it seems to me more and more companies are hiding behind the T & C's when they know it is not practical for customers to go through them.

 

I know you could argue that the blame rests with the customer but think about it if you got say twenty quotes are you really going to read through them all to see exactly what is covered? No in reality you go by what the site or company tells you.

 

To be honest it was more the company I was dealing with's attitude that got on my nerves, I could feel the guy thinking no sale here so i dont care.

The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Insurance is ok when it is straight forward but it seems to me more and more companies are hiding behind the T & C's when they know it is not practical for customers to go through them.

 

Insurance companies are merely glorified bookmakers, the only difference being bookmakers are far more likely to pay out in full on a legitimate claim :D
Link to post
Share on other sites

That was what I was getting at, I've just realized my words have been interpreted wrongly. I meant insurance is a con in terms of the way it is administered.

 

As an ex bookie I need to make another comment...

 

Interesting to note that, contrary to the average punters opinion, the rules applied in a particular betting shop are clearly set out. Nobody reads them, but they are there to see and don't change often. Different firms have some slightly different rules BUT most of these rules are common sense. For example in a dead heat you get half your stake not half the odds because if you got half the odds the bookie could make a loss.

 

Why should I care the punter cries? Well because this risk would be reflected in the prices generally so that when you did back a winner the price would very likely be lower.

 

The rules governing betting seemed to me to be very much governed by common sense and most of the ones which limit what the customer can do came about because somebody did beat the bookie somehow.

 

With insurance it seems that the rights of the parties are too much in favour of the insurer.

 

Anyway can anyone give any guidance to the threadstarter? I think it best if I started my own thread for a sincere dialog with those who work in the insurance industry.

 

I too give my time for free and would like to get some more of the other side of the equation.

The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know you could argue that the blame rests with the customer but think about it if you got say twenty quotes are you really going to read through them all to see exactly what is covered? No in reality you go by what the site or company tells you.

 

In response to this, I would say that there is a 14-day cooling-off period when someone buys a policy. That, I believe, should give the customer ample time to read through the terms and conditions, read through what is covered and decide whether the policy meets their needs. If there is anything they don't understand, they can always ask.

I realise some people don't bother to read terms and conditions, but if they don't then they can't really complain if it turns out they're not covered for something.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...