Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi all,   As stated in another topic, we have moved to a new home. IDRWW has recently sent a letter to my old address and luckily the new tenant of our old place managed to give me the letter.   As the moderators suggested I should inform them of my new address with just my name (not to mention any debt and with no signature). I plan to send them a recorded letter. My question is what is the guarantee that they will not send a court claim to my old address?   Thank you so much for your help.
    • Come on UB as far as PCR  Test at 40 cycles is concerned a cold IS covid.
    • We believe this firm may be providing financial services or products in the UK without our authorisation. Find out why you should be wary of dealing with this unauthorised firm and how to protect yourself.View the full article
    • This is a general comment on the entire situation. First of all that it's been mentioned, by the dealer I believe, that there are no consumer rights in this case because the car is of satisfactory quality. However, the dealer is wrong. This complaint does not relate to the requirement of "satisfactory quality". It relates to the statutory provision that goods must match their description. One can say that this is a much easier factor to measure then "satisfactory quality" which is a kind of rule of thumb view based on the expectations of reasonable consumers. It's very much easier to look at the description of the vehicle when it was being advertised and to compare it with what was actually received. So in that respect, the question is still at large whether the vehicle was as described. In respect of that if the OP is interested in taking some kind of action then I would start off by getting an independent inspection of the bonnet and of the video to see whether an independent inspector formed the view that the damage to the bonnet had been underplayed – either deliberately or accidentally, it doesn't matter. The second comment here relates to the quantum of damages which will be available if the OP brought an action against the dealer and succeeded. I understand that the entire cost of re-spraying the bonnet and then blending the colour into the wings et cetera is something like about £550. This means that an expenditure of £550 would produce a car bonnet which was essentially in new condition. However, the OP did not purchase a new car. The OP purchased a car which was second-hand and which had already suffered normal wear and tear and in respect of which at least some damage on the bonnet had been pointed out. I'm going to say now that the pictures supplied by the OP clearly have emphasised the damage. I don't know whether they have exaggerated the damage but certainly if the dealer had posted those pictures, then he would not been able to sell the car – or at least not at that price. From that point of view is it seems that it is quite possible that there was an element of underplay. If an independent inspection decided that the car had been mis-described and this report persuaded the court, then the court would award a judgement. However the court would then have to decide on the award of damages. A court would balk at awarding a level of damages which essentially handed the claimant a bonnet in brand-new condition – in other words better than she expected to receive when she bought the car. This means that the court have to calculate an apportionment of damages. This calculation would be based on the cost of repairing the bonnet and subtracting the value of the damage already in existence. So for instance, cost of repairs equals £550. Value of existing damage, say, £300 – total award approximately £250. Of course I have no idea whether these figures are correct. The only figure we can actually be certain of is the cost of repairing the bonnet. The rest of it is subject to argument and eventually a decision by the court. A reasonable way of measuring the value of the existing damage to the bonnet might be by trying to assess its effect on the resale value of the car.  What I'm saying here is that people have to tailor their expectations to take into consideration the diminution in value of the goods they have purchased by taking into account the age of that good and any defects that have already been pointed out. Reciprocally the dealer has a certain duty of candour and that is to be brutally frank about what they are selling in order to avoid these unpleasant and damaging disputes. I understand the dealer has already paid out £150. Then the OP may still be out of pocket but she will not be out of pocket to the tune of a completely renovated bonnet.  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Thought the MPP was life insurance


matt-man
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5219 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,

Recently my mother passed away after a battle from cancer. Whilst going through everything my dad was looking for her life insurance documents and what he thought was life insurance turned out to be MPP and just in my dads name at that!

They took a mortgage with Woolwich in 2003 which was interest only as they had an endowment which has life insurance built into it. This endowment is going to pay out as she has died however they took an additional £20k which wasn't covered hence why dad thought they had given them both life insurance to cover it.

My dad has been down to see the manager and a letter was then sent to him saying that they always recommend MPP blah blah and that there was a 30 day cooling off period etc but they beleive everything to be as discussed.

 

Where does my dad stand on this? He honestly thoought they had protected both of them for the additional borrowings in the case of death.

 

Is it a matter of tough luck, you should of read the policy details?

19/02: S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent to A & L

20/02 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent to HBoS

20/02 SAR sent to Capital One

21/02 Prem letter sent to RBS for £304

Link to post
Share on other sites

bump

19/02: S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent to A & L

20/02 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent to HBoS

20/02 SAR sent to Capital One

21/02 Prem letter sent to RBS for £304

Link to post
Share on other sites

bump bump.....anybody?

19/02: S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent to A & L

20/02 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent to HBoS

20/02 SAR sent to Capital One

21/02 Prem letter sent to RBS for £304

Link to post
Share on other sites

more bumps! anyone?

19/02: S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent to A & L

20/02 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent to HBoS

20/02 SAR sent to Capital One

21/02 Prem letter sent to RBS for £304

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Please? Bump again?

19/02: S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent to A & L

20/02 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent to HBoS

20/02 SAR sent to Capital One

21/02 Prem letter sent to RBS for £304

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...