Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks for posting the CPR contents. i do wish you hadn't blanked out the dates and times since at times they can be relevant . Can you please repost including times and dates. They say that they sent a copy of  the original  PCN that they sent to the Hirer  along with your hire agreement documents. Did you receive them and if so can you please upload the original PCN without erasing dates and times. If they did include  all the paperwork they said, then that PCN is pretty near compliant except for their error with the discount time. In the Act it isn't actually specified but to offer a discount for 14 days from the OFFENCE is a joke. the offence occurred probably a couple of months prior to you receiving your Notice to Hirer.  Also the words in parentheses n the Act have been missed off. Section 14 [5][c] (c)warn the hirer that if, after the period of 21 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to hirer is given, the amount of unpaid parking charges referred to in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)(f) or 9(2)(f) (as the case may be) has not been paid in full, the creditor will (if any applicable requirements are met) have the right to recover from the hirer so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Though it states "if any applicable ...." as opposed to "if all applicable......" in Section 8 or 9. Maybe the Site could explain what the difference between the two terms mean if there is a difference. Also on your claim form they keeper referring to you as the driver or the keeper.  You are the Hirer and only the Hirer is responsible for the charge EVEN IF THEY WEREN'T THE DRIVER. So they cannot pursue the driver and nowhere in the Hirer section of the Act is the hirer ever named as the keeper so NPC are pursuing the wrong person.  
    • This is simply a scam site.  It's been shown to be a scam in the national press and on national TV. Please fill in the the forum sticky and upload the invoice you've received. In fact what you have is an invoice, not a fine, a private company doesn't have the power to issue fines.  
    • Moved to the Private Parking forum.
    • Good afternoon, I am writing because I am very frustrated. I received a parking fine from MET Parking Services Ltd , ( Southgate park Stansted CM24 1PY) . We stopped for a quick meal in Mcdonalds and were there fir around 30 mins. We always do this after flights and never received a parking fine before.  Reason: The vehicle left in Southgate car park without payment made for parking and the occupants southgate premises. they took some pictures of us leaving the car. i did not try and appeal it yet as I came across many forums that this is a scam and I should leave it. But I keep getting threatening letters.  Incident happened : 23/10/2023 I did contact Mcdonalds and they said this:  Joylyn (McDonald’s Customer Services) 5 Apr 2024, 12:05 BST Dear Laura, Thank you for contacting McDonald’s Customer Services. I’m sorry to hear that you have received a Parking Charge Notice following your visit to our Stansted restaurant.   We've introduced parking restrictions at some of our restaurants to make sure there are always parking spaces available for customers.   We appreciate that some visits such as birthday parties or large group visits might take longer and the parking restrictions aren't intended to stop this. If you think your stay will exceed the stated maximum parking time then please speak to a manager in advance.   Your number plate is scanned by our Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) system when you enter our car park, and then again when you leave. If you have overstayed the maximum time allowed, you will not be notified straight away- a Parking Charge Notice will be sent to you via the post.   If you feel that a Parking Charge Notice has been issued in error, please contact our approved contractors who issued the charge in order to appeal the charge. Unfortunately McDonald's are unable to revoke parking tickets- the outcome of the appeal is final and cannot be overturned by McDonald’s.   Many thanks for taking the time to contact McDonald’s Customer Services.   Can someone please help me out and suggest what I should do next?  Thank you 
  • 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

Welcome Finance - This company needs to be banned.


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4551 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

  • Replies 9.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Apologies guys but I have to say that very often I flick onto this site without signing in and so will be seen as a guest which I'm guessing a lot of people also do. That's not to say that Cattles/Welcome staff don't also come on here but they could come on as a registered user anyway. It just really frustrates me that sometimes it feels as though a priviledged few have access to information which could in fact help many others?

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi jb9876

 

we know welcome are a regular on this thread, there are a few of us who go to the bare bones with welcome.

 

we are not keeping things to our self

 

when the time is right all info is posted

 

a few caggers have court claims for instance

 

certain info we wait for months and months, then it falls into our lap

 

we need clearence to post that sort of info

 

i myself have no dealings with welcome now

i do it for

 

REVENGE:-D

Edited by postggj
Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies guys but I have to say that very often I flick onto this site without signing in and so will be seen as a guest which I'm guessing a lot of people also do. That's not to say that Cattles/Welcome staff don't also come on here but they could come on as a registered user anyway. It just really frustrates me that sometimes it feels as though a priviledged few have access to information which could in fact help many others?

 

With all due respect I really hate it when people infer that we (including me) are being selfish. I do a lot of work on this forum and have helped a number of people especially with this company - however there are somethings that cannot be discussed on forum - whilst I appreciate so guests are legitimate I also KNOW that Welcome are on this thread regularly and therefore I chose what I want to put in public and what I don't and do not think I should be judged for that.

 

If I was I would take my information and help of forum completely sort out my own case and think screw everyone else - but I dont - I''m on her daily helping in a variety of manners and what goes on behind the scenes is generally for the greater good.

 

I'm sure you are aware of case law and precedents being set - some of us are in court and are about to set some and then Welcome will be coming down to earth with an almighty bang and everyone will be able to take advantage of this.

 

So perhaps people should have a little more patience.....

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

just a small tip,

 

If you have a welcome loan agreement which has an acceptance fee on it, then get all the documents together and somewhere within it you will have a sheet which breaks down the payments. in that sheet it will say

 

 

Repayment £xxxx

Acceptance fee £4.05

PPI £40

 

Total monthly payment £216.60 for example

 

now if you take £4.05 and multiply it by the loan, in this case which i have its 180 months, you get the outcome of total acceptance fee payable £810 NOT £235

 

this is also sufficient to render the agreement UNENFORCEABLE

 

 

HTH

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok well DG have sent me a letter called Policy Schedule which was dated yesterday and addresses like a letter. It is trying to be a schedule of Insurance but not sure if it fits the bill and will be getting it checked out.

 

What I don't understand is why after DG and Welcome constantly insisting it is nothing to do with Welcome, yet it has Welcome's letterhead and name all over itand no mention of DG.

 

The way they add some figures in underneath relate to the car finance which any insurance broker would not need to include.

 

In my opinion a very poor effort Welcome.

Must Try Harder!!!!!

Direct Auto Finance & DLC dispute ongoing.

Offer with confidentually agreement from DLC / DAF DECLINED :D

Please PM me if you have any cheap rate or 0800 number for DCA's to add to my list and also to my website

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi HTH,

 

Excuse me if I am a bit thick on this but when I multiply £4.05 by 180, I make it £729.00 not £810.00 !!!

 

I am probably missing something anyway ...Duh :confused:

 

Take care

 

Voda

 

 

just a small tip,

 

If you have a welcome loan agreement which has an acceptance fee on it, then get all the documents together and somewhere within it you will have a sheet which breaks down the payments. in that sheet it will say

 

 

Repayment £xxxx

Acceptance fee £4.05

PPI £40

 

Total monthly payment £216.60 for example

 

now if you take £4.05 and multiply it by the loan, in this case which i have its 180 months, you get the outcome of total acceptance fee payable £810 NOT £235

 

this is also sufficient to render the agreement UNENFORCEABLE

 

 

HTH

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Paul,

 

Many thanks for your answer.

 

I get it now, I think !!! ;)

 

Take care

 

Voda

 

HTH = Hope This Helps lol

 

but it was an example for illustration purposes only, i was merely pointing out that they are in error

 

Regards

 

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

just a small tip,

 

If you have a welcome loan agreement which has an acceptance fee on it, then get all the documents together and somewhere within it you will have a sheet which breaks down the payments. in that sheet it will say

 

 

Repayment £xxxx

Acceptance fee £4.05

PPI £40

 

Total monthly payment £216.60 for example

 

now if you take £4.05 and multiply it by the loan, in this case which i have its 180 months, you get the outcome of total acceptance fee payable £810 NOT £235

 

this is also sufficient to render the agreement UNENFORCEABLE

 

 

HTH

 

Hi everyone - I have not posted for a while (I have been fighting a losing battle with HBOS to reclaim bank charges)

 

Our complaint is currently with the FOS regarding this acceptance fee business and our account still in dispute (even though Welcome says it isn't)

 

I just wanted let you know our final response from welcome on this stated that our agreement is enforceable as they have written on the agreement that interest will be charged on the outstanding daily balance and the acceptance fee. They also state that this is ok because it is no less prominent than the rest of the terms and conditions.

 

Now we have advised them that we will wait and see what FOS has to say before the dispute will be resolved as of course they are going to say their agreement is enforceable.

 

Do you think they a right or are we right to keep this in dispute?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The old rules apply to agreements made prior to april 2007, therefore if PPI was not a condition for making the agreement then the agreement could be potentially unenforceable. Breaches in the execution of the Act.

 

Anyone wants a good read I would strongly recommend the following large binders............

 

I purchased the following books Encyclopedia of Consumer Credit Law by A G Guest & M G Lloyd ( Sweet & Maxwell) Volume 1&2

 

Also Consumer Credit Legislation by Goode Volume 1,2,3

 

I have been researching the consumer credit act for a while now and I cannot believe the number of credit agreements which could be rendered as being unenforceable.

 

I sometimes wonder why personal loans need to be on variable rates? is this because they increase the APR when someone dont pay up? mmmmm I wonder.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Millymo

 

Welcome Can Put What It Likes On An Agreement

Does Not Make It Legal

 

Its All Smoke Screen And Mirrors Again

 

Keep It In Dispute Until You Get The Word From The Fos

 

Thanks Post - That is what we were thinking - I was kind of hoping Welcome would have disappeared by the time the FOS reached a decision. It might happen yet though - I guess we will find out in next few weeks :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine is with the FOS to be honest im not to hopefull of getting the result I want from them they seem to tread on egg shells around these companies will probably need to take it to court but wait a little longer for the FOS decision first

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4551 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...