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 
      • 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

LTSB give away money voluntarily!


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6107 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 received this from LTSB yesterday. It is referenced to my, now closed, business account.

 

From Business Banking

Colmore Row.

 

Dear Elsinore,

We recently wrote to you concerning a refund of charges and notice that we do not yet appear to have received a reply.

 

We have identified that, unfortunately, some customers were incorrectly charged an unauthorised borrowing fee when their account went overdrawn or above their overdraft limit without prior arrangement. Our policy is that we do not charge in such situations when the amount involved is £50 or less.

 

Please accept our sincere apologies for this error.

 

In calculating your refund we have reviewed our system records which date back to September 2001. On this basis your refund amount has been calculated as £20.00

 

In addition, we will be adding interest calculated at 12% P/A gross, from the date of the incorrect charge, to arrive at a total amount due which will be confirmed on payment.

 

To allow us to send the refund to you, please complete the attached payment instruction form and return it to us in the enclosed pre-paid envelope.

 

You will appreciate that we may need to make additional background checks to ensure that the refund is paid to the correct business.

 

If you have any other queries or concerns, please telephone 08345 603 7259 between 9am and 5pm.

 

We aim to provide the highest level of customer service possible. However, if you experience a problem we will always seek to resolve this as quickly and efficiently as possible. A copy of our ‘How to voice your concerns’ leaflet can be obtained by contacting us. The complaint procedures are also on our website www.lloydstsb.com/business/contactus.

 

Once again, please accept our apologies for this error.

 

Yours sincerely

Gary McConnell

Senior Manager – Customer Support

 

Has anbody else received one of these? In my case it's only £20, but I imagine there will be a lot of business account holders being offered significantly greater sums. The payment instruction form referred to in the letter is quite innocuous and contains no 'conditions'.

 

How odd!

 

Els

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh??!!:-?

 

Some mistake, surely!!

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That was my first reaction, Gary.

 

However, this morning I got another one! An exact duplication of the first letter, which implies that it is a template letter, which in turn suggests that it's going out to others.

 

Anyway, I'm returning the payment instruction form, so we'll see what happens!

 

Els

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi all ,i got one one of them letter's sent to me after i lerft lloyds i was offered 50+interest which amounted to 84 quid, i took it, 2 may is my court preliminary hearing for allmost 3k inc interest +costs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Els!!

 

I received one of these letters back in september 2006. It amounted to 7 x £10.00 charegs plus £48.40 interest (tot £118.40).

 

I have two thoughts on this:

 

1) Maybe it was intended as a sweetener so I wouldn't go attempt to reclaim any other charges?

 

2) Could they have been starting with the lowest charge amounts and then work thier way upwards ( ie. £10, then £20, then £25, etc...) all the way to the £60 they charged me on several occaisions (including one particular day that they charged me £60 TWICE!!!!

 

Suffice to say, I heard no more!!! :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha ha! Got this today!

 

"Dear Els,

 

Thank you for returning the completed form as requested.

 

In repect of the refund of unauthorised borrowing fees we have

calculated the amount due and enclose a cheque as follows:

 

Refund of unauthorised borroowing fee £20.00

Plus interest from the date of the unauthorised borrowing fee

until 5 days after the date of this letter calculated at 12% P/A

gross £12.24

Total Amount £32.24

 

If you have any futher queries, etc; etc"

 

Thank you, LTSB. That'll buy a case of six bottles of Els's favourite

tipple!:D

 

Els

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I'm currently investigating this phenomenon and would ask for the assistance of any of you who have received one of these letters.

 

Please could you let me know roughly what the UB sequence number of your letter is? (No need to be too specific, nearest 100 or 1000 would suffice).

 

eg. Mine is around 12290.

 

Thanks,

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Steve...

 

Thanks for the PM. I have PM'd you back. For what it's worth, my ref no. began U0... not UB.

 

Also, it's an interesting line of thought on your thread and may be worth anyone who's had one of these letters having a read through.

 

Look forward to your thoughts.

 

pass :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I HAD A REFUND FROM THAT same template letter mine came to £58, they sent letter soon after i started my claim for 3k, i won chek my thread

 

Thanks for the PM replies folks.

 

Bobcatman, did you utilise the fact that what they were attempting to refund wasn't your losses amounted to as a result of their error in your court action?

Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, my ref no. began U0... not UB.

 

Just checked, my mistake, I didn't have a copy in front of me. Mine starts U0 too (although god help them if they have to use the most significant digit!!!!!)

 

Has anyone received one of these for a personal account? I get the feeling that it seems to be restricted to business accounts at present. But that's probably not surprising in that they use different computer systems for personal and business accounts (as my account manager explained to me.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Have recently received a letter offering an increased sum in respect of this issue and interest at 30%! No confidentiality clause or other conditions. Lot's of waffle about stuff that just doesn't fit with the fact that they have effectively admitted that I am correct and that they have misrepresented the extent of losses incurred by their unauthorised borrowing from our account.

 

Not sure where to go from here, the amount is not really the issue (now circa £150 + £150 compensation) but the principle is that I believe that they should now (in the knowledge that they have got their sums wrong) fix everyone elses losses in respect of this matter. So far they have not offered to do this so I am loath to let it lie since it would appear that this has affected at least 30,000 accounts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...