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

Barclays take over of Woolwich new charges


thetwins2
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6212 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

Did anyone else get thier nice little letter today about Barclays taking over woolwich.

 

In thier booklet it says "charges for unpaid dd and standing orders" £15 maximum per account per day (not per item)

 

Has anyone else noticed this.... abit different thn the £25 per item we have been charged for years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done for spotting that, I did get my letter(s) today, but have been too busy chasing up the recorded delivery item they have chosen not to sign that i sent them last week to read through the booklets. I wonder if this will take effect immediately or will it happen in June when they finally merge?

 

SN

Link to post
Share on other sites

I closed my account with them a few weeks ago so they aren't sending me any polite little notices :D

3 Active Claims:

Barclays Refund of Bank Charges (Sole account) - Applied to lift court ordered Stay

Barclays Refund of Bank Charges (Joint account) - Awaiting court date

Barclays Refund of Bank Charges (Joint account) Pre-6 yrs- LBA sent.

 

 

3 Wins :

Barclays t/a The Woolwich (Data Protection Act breach costs & compliance)

HSBC (on behalf of brother)

Settled Out of Court - £3,874.76

Alliance & Leicester (on behalf of friend)

Settled Out of Court - £723.41

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done for spotting that, I did get my letter(s) today, but have been too busy chasing up the recorded delivery item they have chosen not to sign that i sent them last week to read through the booklets. I wonder if this will take effect immediately or will it happen in June when they finally merge?

 

SN

 

errr sorry they will be part of barclays as of 4th may not june.

Link to post
Share on other sites

errr sorry they will be part of barclays as of 4th may not june

 

I'm a bit confused then as the letter I received from them dated April 2007 states

 

"On or after 24th June 2007 the Woolwich current/savings accounts shown on the enclosed list for which you are a trustee or have authority over will be transferred to Barclays."

 

The mind boggles...!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a bit confused then as the letter I received from them dated April 2007 states

 

 

 

The mind boggles...!

 

oh right? the mind does boggle?:confused: in my woolwich branch it clearly states in BARCLAYS usual ;) that from the 4th may the woolwich bye bye.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see they sill have every intention to continue charging excessively for 'Paid Referral Fees' & 'Unpaid Direct Debits' at £30 & £35 repectively.

 

You'd think that with masses of customers reclaiming their charges they might actually start to rework their charges and bring them in line with what the OFT consider to be reasonable and fair.

 

Oh well, it doesn't really matter because we can continue claiming back from them all the while this continues. Bigger fools them!!!

 

Hedgerow :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...