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

Pookeymonkey v GE Money *Help needed please*


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6105 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:)

 

I am in the process of trying to claim my charges off Ge Money and they received my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) 3/7/2007 which gives them until 22/8/2007 to comply with my request. The SAR was for 6 accounts with them although some probably do not have any charges on them, but I though what the hell, add them to the letter anyway.

 

I have now received a letter for 1 of the accounts and it basicaly says:

 

We understand you are of the opinion we are not entitled to charge the fees specified in your credit agreement etc..etc...

 

Blah Blah about my terms and conditions and how I accepted them when I opened the account............

 

We are reviewing OFT's publication of its findings into default charges.....Our view remains we are entitled to charge these fees which is consistant with OFT's views.....

 

Then all of a sudden they change their tune halfway through the letter and offer me a goodwill gesture to refund the charges that I had previously been charged in full and final settlement of this matter. They have refunded around £100 to my DCA who is now collecting on this account.

 

I have no idea as to the amount I have been charged on this account as they have yet to comply with my SAR. Do I accept this amount as partial payment and wait for the 22/8/2007 SAR due date?

 

Anyone have any thoughts on this as I do not know what they are playing at:confused:

 

Cheers pookeymonkey:p

I'm in the DCA kicking business ..........and business is good!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) was for 6 accounts with them although some probably do not have any charges on them, but I though what the hell, add them to the letter anyway.

 

i agree, and that is what i did. regardless of charges or not, you are entitled to the information they hold on you.

 

They have refunded around £100 to my DCA who is now collecting on this account.

 

what? dont quite understand. are you getting the £100 or the DCA? any money claimed for unlawful charges is yours and not the DCA's.

 

I would write to them reminding them that they have x amount of days left to satisfy your request, IN FULL and that you are not in a position to accept or refuse their goodwill gesture, although it has been noted accordingly.

I am not a legal expert and my words are my opinion only and do not constitute legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi nfi247:)

 

My account has been dealt with by a DCA for the past few months and GE Money/Capital (or whatever they go by) have said

 

"the total amount that has been refunded is £90. This amount will be credited against your outstanding balance held with C L Finance Ltd".

 

They are definately playing silly buggers!

 

Pookeymonkey:p

I'm in the DCA kicking business ..........and business is good!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

that makes it easier, reject there offer and inform them that any and all payments made in relation to any and all unlawful charges should be in a cheque made payable to you.

I am not a legal expert and my words are my opinion only and do not constitute legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks nfi247

 

:)

that makes it easier, reject there offer and inform them that any and all payments made in relation to any and all unlawful charges should be in a cheque made payable to you.

 

I shall be writing them a very nice letter saying just that (the cheeky buggers!).

 

Pookeymonkey:p

I'm in the DCA kicking business ..........and business is good!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...