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

halifax default credit agreements**WON**


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5779 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 143
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

quick question

just received acknowledgement for my sar from hbos.

it states it will release information i am entitled to receive.

is this around about way of telling me certain info will be with held (clever wording) or is it all info they have on me they have to release

 

many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

ok people this is interesting

halifax on the phone agreed to remove default (call recorded ) 27/08/07

one week later default still there, halifax denied conversation took place till i sent transcript/recording to them.

requested halifax own recording, they said was authorised 4/09/07

i never got it despite repeated requests.

on the 23/10/07 i sent second subject access request detailing my conversation and recording.

bear in mind i made an official request on the 4/09/07 for this information.

called the bank today as still not received my sar.

they state

the data recording has been deleated as it is company policy to do this after one month.

they received my sar on the 24/10/07, confirmed by royal mail track and trace, but have only cashed my check last week.

 

comments please

 

typical hbos

Link to post
Share on other sites

i realy need some help hear as i am about to issue court claim against hbos. to cut it short hear are the details

 

1/ the bank has addmitted it has no cca

 

2/ in my sar no record of default notice or that one has been sent out

 

3/ after an official request for a call transcript , very damaging, i was informed 3 weeks later tape was deleated. need to get this right, whats my best coarse of action

 

many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

postggj,

 

Firstly, I think your thread is in the wrong place - general debt is a busy forum, hence why I think no one has "been in" to help out. I can't presume to tell you what to do, but my suggestion would be that you ask a site helper to move your thread to the Default/Legalities Sub-forum as it's more relevant to your issue. Just my opinion though... Either way, I'm happy to lend a hand here, if I can!

 

I have a LOT of these types of claims ongoing - most of which are beyond the N1 issue stage. You may want to have a look through my threads to see what is going on with those, as I have some in similar (though not exactly the same) situations.

 

I know you've already sent your claim form off, but can you post up what your POC were?

 

Have you had notice off issue of the claim from the Court yet?

 

Has the Court cashed your cheque, if you sent one?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok - I was only asking because, had you issued already, you may have been able to request the Court ditch your N1 and send a new one. (had the POC not been correct)

 

So, do you have a letter from HBOS saying "we do not have an agreement"?

 

Do you have proof of postage/receipt of your SAR letter? Have they cashed your cheque, if one was sent?

 

This sounds really straight forward - so, I'm thinking, Court action may not be necessary! You clearly have a case that can to to the Financial Services Ombudsman (enforcing an agreement by Defaulting you when no agreement exists) and the ICO. (Processing inaccurate information under the DPA with CRA's and ignoring a SAR request)

 

Are there other issues bubbling underneath though? For example;

  • Have you claimed against them for charges/fees applied to the account?
  • If they can't prove they have Defaulted you correctly, or the Default amount (if any) included charges/fees, you can claim they have unlawfully Defaulted you, as there is no agreement and any Default amount is inaccurate due to charges/fees. This can give you a claim against them for negative effect to your credit rating; see here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/data-protection-default-issues/115630-pricing-default.html

 

The question is - do you want to go to Court to reclaim everything? (Damages for unlawful Default, possibily reclaiming everything you've paid them as there is no agreement) Or, do you simply want the Default removed?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

the account was defaulted for about £900

when i did my sar i did not ask for repayment of penalty charges, they must have assumed why i wanted my sar. without asking they are refunding £450 as a good will gesture.

all i am after is the default removed

everything sent by special delievery and have correspondents from hbos about no cca, and return of charges

Link to post
Share on other sites

all i am after is the default removed

 

Ok, what is your preference then - Court or FSO/I.C.O.?

 

Court will cost and may slightly take longer, but you could get damages along the way.

 

FSO/I.C.O. is free and slightly quicker and should be a done deal with no agreement. (It will also cost the Bank money to have the FSO investigate, which could get them to remove the Default quicker in settlement, I'm thinking?)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so visit their websites;

 

Financial Ombudsman Service

Information Commissioner's Office - ICO

and complete the complaint forms - basically outline what you've said on this thread already, as it's clear to me what your issue is and should be to them too. You will need to send copies of all documentation, along with proof of postage/receipt you have, as attachments.

 

The ICO website is good because you can submit all this online using their form. The FSO is still in the dark ages and you have to print/sign their complaint form, then post it with the documentation you have.

 

I think the ICO won't be much help, as they tend to take the view that "a debt must have existed as you received credit from the bank and made payments, so no breach in DPA" - this is completely wrong, IMO. They should tell the Bank to comply with your SAR request - although they can't force them to comply. (Only a Court can do that, I believe)

 

You should get a better result from the FSO though.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...