Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Just a typo change that I'd make for the last line. Maybe also add something that says "I assume you will be fully aware that you cannot rely on a clause of a contract that you do not produce."
    • Hello, Firstly, and most importantly I am sorry for your loss. I would go back to the bank with the death certificate and ask them to step in. Remind them firmly but politely that there is no limit for DD claims   Please let us know how you get on.
    • My wife is the named person to his bank account with him having Dementia being his daughter (I say named person she still is but he recently passed away and the deputyship application has now being stopped by the solicitor as it's no longer needed) We've only just got the Death Certificate so the bank will be the next step informing them. She went to the bank and explained the situation but even being his named person the bank said she didn't have the power to stop DD without any legal documents (virgin money) was the bank. She could have copies of bank statements that was about it.
    • I see you said you tried to stop the DD but it seems that didn't work. May I please ask why that didn't work? You should be asking your bank to cancel the DD and I don't see why they would have objected, hopefully you can clarify this. I agree that you should be making a claim here against your bank and ask them for a DD refund. There is no timeframes for this.
    • Thanks DX,   I wasn't aware we could do that for that length of time. I'll ask my wife to check with the bank this week
  • 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

Chunky Linc Vs. HSBC


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4733 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

  • Replies 169
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Can I ask for less of the hijacks please. I too am keen to learn what's gone on, and every time someone posts get the usual alerts. It also makes it harder for others to follow the thread.

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Ahhhhhh Im back, soz off work ill and then on hol for a couple of weeks, so that's just about taken up all my time..... Actually you guy's were right that was just my cover for runnin off with Rachel Thomlinson to have lots of little 'mini thomlinson' clones so that they can also work mind numbyingly at DG. It was a fri nite, we met at an un disclosed location, she was the one wearing a yellow carnation....However she was a bit of a minger so I had to sink several voddies and the unfortunatly couldnt get it up, so nowt happened and im back....lol.

 

Ta for your concerns, but im alive and I've not settled with them yet. a bit of a quick update....

 

I attended the hearing, I thought I'd be on my own, but when I got to court there was approx 40 other people there. Most people got called in for the first hearing (inc me) where the judge explained to everyone that All cases were being put on stay and he then answered a few questions. The court gimp then realised that I should actually be in the 2nd hearing because HSBC & Barclays had sent along a barrister, so I remained seated, joined the 2nd sitting and listened to the whole lot again....

 

Upon return home I found the following two letter in the post pile...

 

1) Letter from DG referring to the order granted by Norwich County Court dated 23rd Aug 07 and to refer to the terms of that orer and that further info on the test case was available at the OFT's website.

 

2) General Form of Judgment or Order (whatever the hell this is? I'll type what it says below, but this is the first and only correspondence I've had with the court since the hearing and since sending the court the letter trying to get the stay removed)...

 

Before District Judge Sparrow sitting at Norwich County Court.....

 

Upon neither party attending

 

It is Ordered that

 

1) Save as appears in this order, this action be stayed pending the final decision (being judgement in the action or the appellate court, whichever is later) in the test case between OFT V Abbey National Bank plc & the others or further order of the court.

 

2) The defendant shall by 4:00pm 14th Sept 2007 or by 4:00pm 21 days from the date of this order whichever is the later serve on the claimant a copy of the Particulars of Claim in the test case or notify the claimant of a website where the statement of claim may be viewed and downloaded

 

3) The Defendant shall within 21 days of the final decision in the test case file at court and serve the claimant: a) A case summary of not more than 500 words setting out the effect of the fihnal decision in the test case on this action. b) their proposed direction in this case.

 

4) Upon receipt of the documents set out in paragraph3 of this order the file be referred to a district judge to onsider further directions.

 

5) Either party may apply to vary or discharge this order, provided that any apploication is made in accordance with part 23 of the civel procedure rules and made on 21 days notice.

 

dated 07th Aug 2007.

 

 

 

Well I aint really got a freaking clue what that's all about and was quite surprised to find that on the floor upon return as I didnt think I'd be hearing anything further till the out come of the test case. I did take a look on the site DG recommended (The Office of Fair Trading: making markets work well for consumers) but there wasnt really anything of use on there. Does anyone know how the test case is going? Im actually quite tempted to accept DG's latest offer as it's still valid by another 5 days? so as long as I get the acceptance letter sent off tomorrow 1st class recorded delivery then I should be ok, unless anyone knows a better strategy at this particular moment in time........

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome back CL, we thought you had disappeared on us.

 

The test case doesn't start until January 2008. There have been a few things in the press regarding the OFT and the test case. Pete will probably have some links for you. As the date of your order was 7th August and it gave you 21 days to do anything about it, I have a feeling you may have missed the boat on the lifting of a stay thing.

 

As for accepting theri previous offer, the decision is entirely up to you.

 

Did you get the POC from DG?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]If you think my post was helpful, please feel free to click my scales

 

 

A prudent question is one-half of wisdom.

 

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

2) The defendant shall by 4:00pm 14th Sept 2007 or by 4:00pm 21 days from the date of this order whichever is the later serve on the claimant a copy of the Particulars of Claim in the test case or notify the claimant of a website where the statement of claim may be viewed and downloaded

 

 

This is what was posted

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]If you think my post was helpful, please feel free to click my scales

 

 

A prudent question is one-half of wisdom.

 

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

if they haven't complied then they are again in violation of the court directions and i'd be letting the court know double quick - like applying for a judgment? come on guys, let's think this through - what can he do - they've failed to follow court directions - can the stay be set aside because of this? - - this is complicated, cl, i know it's a struggle - but let's see if we can't get an opinion of this before you take the latest offer - btw - don't sign it if it says you'll never, ever be able to claim from them again - they have done this before and that puts you in a bad position in my opinion.

 

SO, BUMPTY, BUMP - LET'S GET SOME OPINIONS HERE.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...