Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • OpenAI and Reddit reach deal that will give ChatGPT access to content on the social media platform.View the full article
    • Even if that was not a PCN on your car, can you still swear that a PCN was not placed on your car ? NO Even if they showed you a copy of the PCN they sent, can you still wear that they actually sent the first PCN to you? NO Why are still quibbling  when the real argument is why they have broken the Act by telling you that you hadn't paid when in reality they shouldn't have sent that letter out probably until Monday which  would have been deemed received  on Wednesday? If you are that bothered about it, just leave out the start about the windscreen ticket since it isn't why you are complaining.
    • I am sorry that you have come across excel -possibly the most inhumane of all the rogues that ruin parking in private car parks. i am more sorry that I have missed your thread until now. As I understand it, their artic. was parked in front of their parking sign and the Blue badge places forcing you to stop somewhere else in the car park to observe the rules. On realising that even the Blue badge places were paid places and that you did not have the correct coinage you quite rightly decided to leave. Thus you had read their terms and until you have read them and signified your acceptance by either paying or staying, you are not classed as being parked.  You have a MINiMUM of five minutes  leave. Sadly Excel do not understand any words greater than two syllables which is where their problems start. Their greed, ignorance, inhumanity, etc etc all carry on from there. However they do know that Judges do understand what minimum means and are well aware of the Equality Act  so I wouldn't be too worried about what excel  will do. Plus we still have to see their PCN and when it comes to producing a Notice that complies with the Act relating to private car parks they do not excel at that. I hope that the Iceland MD will cancel the ticket. You still have a couple of other routes you could try. The first one is your Member of Parliament will probably be happy to help as they will need all the votes they can get with an election looming. Plus your local newspaper may also pitch in after hearing your story to go after Iceland and excel. [You may notice I have not merite them with a capital E as it is definitely undeserved.]
    • i would focus on a stupid youthful act. ...a waste of time... so what.. it's worked before. when is your hearing? dx    
  • 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

Strange Happenings


calvi36
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6192 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 Guys, am at my wits end with Nationwide. Since commencing the procedure to claim I have had the following happen.

 

S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent. Internet banking locked out then reinstated by having to re-register. SAR reminder sent at 30 days, no response at all non compliance as per 40 day rule. All sent recorded.

 

Complaint made to Information Commissioners Office.

 

SAR responded to with incorrect information, charges to not match the statements I have. They only supplied charges going back 3 years and not 5 years as I requested.

 

Further complaint sent to Information Commissioners Office. Non compliance as incorrect and incomplete data sent.

 

LBA sent for unknown amount, but stating no less than £489 as this is what I have from last 15 months statements.

 

Internet banking again locked out yesterday. They said I must have put in the incorrect passcode, grrrrrrrrrr there is as much chance of that as Elvis being alive and living in a purely platonic relationship with John Lennon.

 

I am starting to get the feeling they are ripping the wee wee.

 

I think I should just issue proceedings against them now for an unknown amount. Any thoughts please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya,

 

They are definitely pushing their luck. I personally wouldn't start a claim until I was sure of the amount. My choice of action would be to file a claim for non-compliance and have the court enforce the S.A.R. I think it would make for a more solid case.

 

You say you sent them the LBA. Was it this one? Non-Complicance LBA Either way, If I were in your situation I would send them a copy, wait 7 days, then file an N1 with these POCs: Data Protection Act-Particulars of Claim

 

Good luck, whatever you decide to do.

 

K.:)

 

 

Kelly

Settled: Nationwide £372.55

Before you do anything read this:

Guide to Reclaiming Bank Charges

 

Most questions can be answered by checking out these links:

Frequently Asked Questions

Step by step instructions

Letter Templates

And don't forget to use the search facility! Chances are your question has already been answered on another thread. Good luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Kelly - you may even get the court to award you a couple of hundred quid in damages!!

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have finally been sent my second list of charges. As I suspected they are hugely different to the first set they sent me, 60% higher. I will have to make a further complaint to Information Commissioners Office as this information is still incomplete as they have only gone back to 2004. I will issue lba for the amount they provided second time round. I will be asking the judge to award damages at his/her discretion for breach of Data Protection Act.

 

Oh I forgot to add my internet banking has been disconnected twice and i have had to reapply to have it connected twice. They state that i must be entering passcodes incorrectly. Pmmmpppphhhh amazing how they have always worked fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi calvi36!

By all means complain to the I.C.

But if I was U, I'd be sorely tempted to do as previously advised and take Nationwide to Court over Non-Compliance of your S.A.R.

In the meantime, why don't U activate the 'parachute' current account, that potential Claimants are advised to open PRIOR to starting the Re-claiming process, and use the online facilities that the NEW account has ???...;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a parachute account mtman. As for taking them only for non compliance, I would rather take them for bank charges and non compliance at the same time. I now have documented proof from them that the original info was wrong, I challenged it as it differed vastly from what my statements said. In the latest letter from them, a bog standard letter they have completely failed to address the information that I requested. I will find my letter and post it here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

24/04/2007

Data Protection Team,

Nationwide Building Society

Kings Park road,

Moulton Park

Northampton NN3 6NW

 

 

 

 

Letter Before Action

 

Dear Sirs

 

Acct No:

THIS IS NOT A STANDARD LETTER SO PLEASE READ IT ALL!

 

Due to recent media coverage on bank charges and the recent OFT announcement I am now aware that you, Nationwide Building Society have been 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. 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.

I wrote to you on 19/03/07 regarding a DPA request and I sent you a reminder letter dated 23/04/07 you finally responded on 04/05/07, I enclosed the maximum standard payment and you cashed this cheque. However you failed to provide me with the relevant information requested as you only provided information going back to 15/05/04.

As you are fully aware I wrote asking for a full DPA Request going back at least 5 years or for full term I have had my account with yourselves and you failed to provide this information.

You have been evasive in the extreme, in your letter you sent you stated “Should you require a copy of your statements or any other information relating to this, or any other accounts you hold please let me know”. As you well know from my letter dated 19/03/07 this had already been requested and you have evaded supplying me with the relevant information.

You have also evaded supplying me with details of any manual intervention on my account which was also requested in the same letter I sent to you on 19/03/07. You have been obstructive in dealing with my DPA request even though you have taken full payment for this. This amounts to evasion.

I wonder what a District Judge would make of the fact that you have been so evasive; I believe disclosure would be ordered.

You enclosed a standard letter stating manual intervention may have been required on my account and you again failed to provide me of the details of this as requested.

The information relating to charges made against me by your building society do not match those on the previous 17 months statements that I have in my possession.

Therefore the information you have provided is incorrect, evasive, obstructive and mis-leading.

I have made one formal complaint to the Information Commissioners Office regarding your breach of the Data protection Act 1998 regarding your failure to comply with this act by responding within 40 days, which you failed to do and I have documentary proof of this.

I will also be making a further complaint informing the ICO of your provision of incorrect information which is again a further breach of the DPA 1998.

I believe you are obstructing any claim I may make against Nationwide Building Society.

Your charges appear to be nothing more than a profit-making scheme. Therefore, I require you to refund my entire bank charges for the past 5 years. Along with evidence that you have refunded all the charges. I hereby give you 14 days notice to refund the charges back on to my account.

Please believe me that I shall pursue this matter as I do not believe anyone should be misled, provided with incorrect information nor face penalty charges. I formally invite you to defend the action I SHALL bring against Nationwide Building Society, to disclose the true cost of your costs incurred in dealing with my account.

I will also not be willing to submit to the normal legal tactics of Nationwide Building Society in offering settlement at the eleventh hour nor should you credit my account with the amount I shall be claiming. This will be rejected completely as I firmly believe I have been penalised by your company who act in a fiduciary role. My trust has gone completely due to the manner in which you have managed my account, evaded DPA request and imposed unlawful charges against me, which has caused undue hardship. You believe you are above the law and I do not believe anyone is, where they to be a PLC, Ltd Company, Sole Trader nor individual.

I truly want this matter to go to court as I have the right to know why I have been penalised in charges by Nationwide Building Society.

This is a personal action and I am acting on behalf of myself and no other person nor group.

I make a direct allegation that Nationwide Building Society has inflicted penalty charges against myself.

I look forward to your response within 14 days, if you fail to respond I will start legal proceedings against Nationwide Building Society.

 

Yours Sincerely

 

 

 

 

calvi36

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a parachute account mtman.
Use it then and stop giving those poor harried 'nice' people, over at Nationwide, a hard time about them blocking your online access...lol...:D

 

Perhaps U PRINTED out your online statements, as U were advised to do so in your other Nationwide Thread???!...

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/nationwide/93425-online-statements.html

 

As for taking them only for non compliance, I would rather take them for bank charges and non compliance at the same time...
'Fraid I'm of the same view as kelly101.

U are opening a 'whole-can-of-worms' for yourself, if U pursue a Claim WITHOUT knowing the precise amount that U are Claiming for.

 

Nationwide have no general history of blanket refusals for transaction requests beyond a couple of years, unlike some other Banks, who threw up 'Micro-fiche' smokescreen arguments until recently.

 

 

IMHO...

Methinks U would be better to chase Nationwide for Non-Compliance of your S.A.R. first.

...Then go for the Penalty Charges!

 

Your Claim will be further complicated by U living in Scotland and U possibly Claiming more than £750.

 

I now have documented proof from them that the original info was wrong, I challenged it as it differed vastly from what my statements said. In the latest letter from them, a bog standard letter they have completely failed to address the information that I requested. I will find my letter and post it here.
Unfortunately, standard replies often bear little, or even any, relevance to what a Claimant has requested.

I can appreciate your frustration on ALL these matters and understand that U want your money asap.

However, if I can remind U, it is the tortoise that usually wins races of this type?!

 

It's YOUR Claim and U will do what U think is best for U.

 

 

Best of luck!...:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer carling! Am just doing the digging for the templates for a non compliance claim. Going from the figs they have supplied me my claim will still be in the small claims court their figs show 478 ex interest and costs. I want to also claim for the work I have done on this since march.

Link to post
Share on other sites

one question on the 750 in scotland. Is this the total amount ex interest and costs, ie if I claim upto 750 ex costs and int is this ok or is the 750 the total amount inc int and costs??

Link to post
Share on other sites

In E & W...The Interest + Costs are EXCLUDED when calculating the Small Claims Track threshold figure (£5,000)

 

U will possibly find the 'Definitive' Scottish Legal System answer somewhere in the following links...

Small Claims Guidance Notes

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/scotland/94302-updated-scottish-procedure.html

 

 

Here's a few Threads of some other recent Scottish Nationwide Claimants...

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/nationwide/69436-sn00psmum-nationwide.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/nationwide/87811-aqualibrium-nationwide.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/nationwide/87951-princesswawa-nationwide.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...