Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Bank Charges Consumer Charter


Michael Browne
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6099 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

Bank charges should be stayed.
The act of reclaiming bank charges has been put on hold while we await the high court decision. Considering the banks are estimated to have paid out over £500 million in penalty charge reclaiming so far this year; this tacit admittance of a problem means it is inappropriate to put a hold on those reclaiming, without putting a hold on the banks continuing to pay out.
Shouldn't this also incluse a request/demand that if there is a moratorium in claims there should also be a moratorium on charges? (ie £0 not £5 pendingthe outcome of the case)

 

Also, I have a business account with NatWest where I have to pay (preumably a fair price) for each transaction. They charge me 38p for paying a DD via BACS. It cannot cost them more than that NOT to pay it!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 154
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Some comments from another thread:

 

I think £5 is a hostage to fortune. It might be about right for bouncing a cheque which is done manually, but for DDs and SOs which are done automatically the figure should be a tenth of that.

 

The cost to the bank of a customer going overdrawn is zero because they charge interest at nearly 30%.

 

Clearly these letters and our defaults do have a cost, but it is still far short of £5 and it's also less than 50p.

 

Data processing is cheap, somewhere in the order of between 0.2 to 0.6 of a penny per record or between £2 and £6 per thousand records if done by an external company - and remember, these companies also make a profit on that too. The banks do it in-house and therefore enjoy cost savings there.

 

Then, if the bank send a letter (many do not) the paper and the envelope have a cost, as does the postage. Paper is around £3 per thousand sheets and white DL window envelopes are £11.49 per thousand from a well known stationery supplier, so it is doubtful the banks pay anything like this for their paper and envelopes.

 

So the total cost per letter? Approximately 1½ pence for the paper and envelope, 34 pence for postage and maybe ½ a penny to process the data. They are printed, folded and inserted by machine at a cost of a fraction of a penny each again, as the process is fully automated.

 

There simply are not armies of operators sitting hunched over terminals keying in data all day to manually pay or decline cheques or DD's. Only in a small minority of cases does a person actually do anything - the vast majority of bounced payments are completely automatic.

 

I think that if we are allowing a "mark-up", the we are agreeing with the bank that it is ok to flout the law on penalty charges, and open the door to a very dangerous way. Let's say the sum is set at £5... For how long? 6 months, 1 year? Then it will go up again, and again, and again, and before you know it, voila, we're back to paying £20, £30, and guess what? It has been agreed that it was ok to apply a mark-up on penalties!

 

Talk of signing a pact with the devil... :rolleyes:

 

In most business a 10-15% markup is acceptable, in retainling it can be 100%. So my estimate of 38p becomes 76p - let's go with that ;)
  • Haha 1

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

• Five pounds is a fair maximum amount for bank charges. The banks have been charging £30 for bank charges, an amount that is totally disproportionate to their actual costs. Most generous estimates are that £2.50 is the appropriate cost, yet by allowing a five pound charge this gives banks the appropriate 100% mark up which is the typical reasonable markup f any other UK High Street business.I absolutely disagree with 5.00, as that would still be a penalty. Most banks don't send letters these days and according to CYNthesys the cost of the defaults is much less then 2.50.
I absolutely disgree too and even £2.50 is only reasonable if there is manual intervention, for example in handling a cheque. Automated transactions only cost pence.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
The £5 figure is there to prevent the OFT coming up with the ridiculous figure of £12 as it did with credit cards.
But if we had put 50p it would have stopped them coming up with a ridiculous figure like £5 ;)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...