Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the xx/xx/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the xx/xx/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, xx/xx/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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

RAC Warranty Mechanical Breakdown Insurance


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6087 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

I purchased one of these policies, top of the range, last October (06). I was told on the phone that it equated with my previous Mercedes Benz Breakdown insurance. In April when I had a breakdown it became obvious that this is not true and when I complained to RAC Warranty and asked them to listen to the call, they admitted, in writing, that I had not been told the truth at the time of the sale. They said they were going to recompense me for this but I have since received nothing. I have since referred this matter to the Financial Ombudsman but the matter is still ongoing. I have now had a further breakdown and this part is also not covered by the RAC policy but would have been covered by the MB policy. When I again discussed this with RAC Warranty they flatly refused to admit any liability and told me that I "had 14 days to cancel the policy at the time of sale" and I hadn't therefore it was my own fault!! I am now hundreds of pounds out of pocket as a consequence of what the firm has admitted were lies on their part and yet I still seem to have hit a brick wall! :!: What's more - I can't afford to cancel this policy and buy the MB policy without the refund of the money for this one and I've been told I'd get no refund. Can anybody help?????? Or can somebody please let me know how I bypass the useless claims and customer service people. PLEASE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Aviva Support

I'm sorry that your feeling so let down by the RAC, if you want to send me the details I'd be happy to get this investigated through my colleagues in the RAC, my email address is [email protected] and I will pass on your details.

 

Becca

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Aviva Support
Thank you for the offer but could you please explain what your connection with RAC is?

Barbara

 

apologies Barbabra!

The RAC is a part of NU, and although I work for NU I can get someone in RAC to investigate this for you.

 

Becca

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonderful. I hadn't realised this. Most of my information is at home but I can give you the following.

The policy was purchased in October 2006 via the phone.

The first breakdown, when I found out that the policy was not as described to me, was in April 2006. Someone from Customer Services called Mr Holland (can't remember his first name) wrote to me confirming they had listened to the call and that I had been given incorrect information. Several letters and calls later I have referred this matter to FOS as it was beyond 8 weeks - they've acknowledged this and apparently applied for the file but nothing else yet.

Current problem is being dealt with by Craig Cartlidge in Claims - it was he who said I'd had my 14 days cooling off!! (and even I know that this is irrelevant in these circumstances). He told me he has talked to Customer Services but I don't know who to. He also said the prior issue was being dealt with as a separate issue - I think they are inextricably linked!! Particularly since its because the first problem hasn't yet been resolved that I'm still in this situation. I was about to check Companies House for the names of some Directors to write to but will wait and see what you can do. Not sure if I should put my policy number, contact info etc on this forum - how do I do this?

Barbara

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Aviva Support
Wonderful. I hadn't realised this. Most of my information is at home but I can give you the following.

The policy was purchased in October 2006 via the phone.

The first breakdown, when I found out that the policy was not as described to me, was in April 2006. Someone from Customer Services called Mr Holland (can't remember his first name) wrote to me confirming they had listened to the call and that I had been given incorrect information. Several letters and calls later I have referred this matter to FOS as it was beyond 8 weeks - they've acknowledged this and apparently applied for the file but nothing else yet.

Current problem is being dealt with by Craig Cartlidge in Claims - it was he who said I'd had my 14 days cooling off!! (and even I know that this is irrelevant in these circumstances). He told me he has talked to Customer Services but I don't know who to. He also said the prior issue was being dealt with as a separate issue - I think they are inextricably linked!! Particularly since its because the first problem hasn't yet been resolved that I'm still in this situation. I was about to check Companies House for the names of some Directors to write to but will wait and see what you can do. Not sure if I should put my policy number, contact info etc on this forum - how do I do this?

Barbara

 

hi Barbara,

Thats fine, I wouldn't want you to put your details into the forum, if you send me an email, my address is [email protected] and I will get in touch :) If you want to wait till you get home I'm in all week and will pick it up tomorrow.

 

All the best

Becca

Link to post
Share on other sites

Becca

My email to you was rejected as follows.

 

- The mail titled : RAC Warranty - discussion thread from CAG has not been delivered. We apologise for the non-delivery and suggest that an alternative method of contacting your intended recipient is used.

 

Possible reasons for this are;

 

1) The email address you used is incorrect or has been changed.

2) The intended recipient no longer works for Norwich Union.

3) The intended recipient is not authorised to receive external email via this route.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Aviva Support

hi Barbara

I'm sorryabout that I mistyped my email address and put an extra fullstop in. I've sent you a PM with a suggestion in. :)

 

Becca

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Becca

When I last spoke to RAC I repeated my complaint that the policy I had been sold was most definitely not as had been described to me and that I didn't consider their simply repeating to me that the exact details of the cover were in the booklet was an adequate response to my complaint - either on the first occasion or now!! I reminded them that I'd been lied to and that this had been admitted and I also pointed out that Mercedes Benz had confirmed that the part that needs to be replaced WOULD have been covered under their policy. Also that MB were amazed that this part, the immobiliser control unit, is not covered in any policy claiming to be a mechanical breakdown policy!!! Reasonable expectation of an average customer would be that it would be covered - particularly if even people in the industry believe it ought to be. That aside, the main point is that I was lied to.

I've today received my written response to that complaint and it simply repeats that the part that is broken is not covered!! This DOES NOT address the problem. Should I escalate the matter through RAC's complaints process - and I can foresee that this will again end up going to FOS - or should I wait until you have had a chance to investigate this??

Barbara

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...