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
      • 160 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

lloyds and overdraft are they right?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6175 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

Hi all, glad i found this site. My question is can you claim back bank charges if you already have an overdraft? i have sent in my claim and have just recieved a letter back from lloyds rejecting my claim because i have an overdraft. They say the default charges are for people who break an agreement and because i went over my agreed overdraft limit they say it doesn't apply.

can anyone shed any light on this please? many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

The simpy answer to your question is yes.

 

However need to know a little bit more about how you have worded your 'claim' ( I assume that it is not this just yet) and please let us know the ammounts involved and the content of the letters you have sent

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi thanks for your reply, i used the standard letter from the BBC website to claim back and the amounts over 6 years on two accounts ammounted to 639 on one and 117 on the other account. I think i have recieved a standard letter back for both accounts and they are both worded the same.

here is a copy of the letter is sent, i have sent one each for both accounts.

thanks for your help.

Due to recent media coverage on bank charges I now believe that you, Lloyds TSB charging me charges that are contrary to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Schedule 2 (e) of the said regulations gives a non-complete list of terms, which may be regarded as unfair, such as a term that requires me as a consumer who fails in his obligation, to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation.

I believe that your charges are disproportionately high and therefore they are contrary to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999. In addition I believe that your charges are a Penalty. Penalty charges are irrecoverable at common law. The precedent for this was Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage and Motor co Ltd [1915] AC 79 along with Murray v. Leisure play [2005] EWCA Civ 963. It was held that a contractual party can only recover damages for an actual loss or liquidated losses. It is clear that your charges do not reflect any actual and or real loss.

Furthermore if you fail to comply with this letter, I request without further notice a breakdown and proof of all costs involved, in regards to your actual or liquidated losses involved in any breach of contract to which these charges relate with yourselves, and that these charges reflect your true costs in relation to the said charges, and are proportionate to the charges levied on my account as defined in Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Schedule 2 (e).

Therefore I require you to refund me a total of £107.16 representing the total, unlawful amount charged during the last 6 years.

I hereby give you 14 days to refund the charges back on to my account. For the avoidance of doubt, if this is not done within 14 days, I will commence my claim in the courts without further warning. This action will inevitably involve you in additional costs.

I also hereby request a detailed report of which clause in your terms and conditions each charge has been applied against.

Yours sincerely,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and thanks, i just typed it out and then went and lost it all. Here goes again, this is the letter i recieved back. only the salient points this time though:

like any business we do make a charge for some of our extra services. When customers don't have enough in their accounts to cover a payment, this always means extra work - and it has to happen quickly. We have to agree to make the payment by setting up or increasing an overdraft, or tell customers we can't agree it. We feel it's fair to charge for this service.

of course it's only fair too, that we're completely open about any charged for services before you might need them. That's why we take care to give every new customer the latest guide to our charges. You can also get up to date details about fees and borrowing rates at all our branches, through our helpline and our website.

just as importantly, we do everything we can to help our customers avoid these charges.

if you know a payment is going to take you over your agreed limit, you're welcome to see if there's anything we can do.

the office of fair trading has published new guidlines on credit card default charges. We're still talking it through with them, but the important point is that the guidelines are about 'default' charges that people pay when they break an agreement with us. this doesn't apply to your charges as these were for dealing with your request to go over your agreed overdraft limit. They are not default charges because you have not broken your agreement. They are our prices for the service we provide in these situations.

I do hope you can see that we make our charging system as fair as possible - and why i can't agree to cancel your charges.

 

This is the bulk of the letter, i don't understand why they talk about cedit card charges, and it seems very conveluted and does not really adress anything.

I believe that i now have to take them to small claims court? I appreciate any help or advice.

Thanks again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi, thanks for the advice. i'll get on to it. I have just recieved more charges as well, do you think it would be ok for me to send off the ammended ones?

thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi, thanks for the advice. i'll get on to it. I have just recieved more charges as well, do you think it would be ok for me to send off the ammended ones? (YES)

thanks again

 

 

XxXxX

;)

If I have been helpful, PLEASE click the scales

 

 

You may receive differing advice as people have had different experiences. Please use your own judgement in deciding whose advice to take. If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional. Any advice I offer is done so informally, without prejudice & without liability.

 

 

I WON !!!!

 

 

HERE WE GO AGAIN .... BRING IT ON

 

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...