Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All
Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

RBS CCA request refused due to CCJ

DandD

By DandD
in Royal Bank of Scotland

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4655 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

paulwlton

paulwlton

Posted
Posted
Penfold,

 

The only reason I did this was because of you!!

 

At least you got a reply. I thought they were going to do a thorough investigation. Didn't this happen?

 

D & D

 

I have no doubt your MP will be forwarding a letter to Sir Tom on your behalf. The bank cannot ignore letters from MPs. Alarm bells will definitely start to ring at head office.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 305
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

DandD

DandD

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hey Paul

 

Tried to send you a PM,But you have 'exceeded your quota'.

 

Toooo popular!!

 

Maybe you can delete some of the old ones?

 

D & D

Link to post
Share on other sites
paulwlton

paulwlton

Posted
Posted
Hey Paul

 

Tried to send you a PM,But you have 'exceeded your quota'.

 

Toooo popular!!

 

Maybe you can delete some of the old ones?

 

D & D

 

 

Cleared.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites
car2403

car2403

Posted
Posted
I have no doubt your MP will be forwarding a letter to Sir Tom on your behalf. The bank cannot ignore letters from MPs. Alarm bells will definitely start to ring at head office.

 

Paul

 

That will be the "Paul Walton Red Alert" alarm bell that has been installed, then?

 

:razz:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
DandD

DandD

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Had a letter back from Sir Fred's office today.

 

It is word for word exactly the same as Penfolds! They must get a few of these.

 

Let's see what they come back with after their 'thorough investigation'!

 

D&D

 

Here's a scan of the Sir Fred letter

 

 

http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll187/DandD_2008/LetterFromSirFred1.jpg
Link to post
Share on other sites
paulwlton

paulwlton

Posted
Posted
this maybe a silly question, but if we have received a letter fom the bank marked 'Private and Confidential'. Would it be foolish to post it here?

 

We really want to show you all what's going on.

 

D & D

 

That is entirley up to you.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites
DandD

DandD

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Got another question.

 

We had 5 accounts with the bank. Mrs D had a Personal Current and I had a Personal Current, all the rest were Joint accounts.

 

The CCJ's were issued seperatley, 2 different claim numbers and slightly different amounts.

 

The CO's are also for slightly different amounts.

 

Does this mean that we owe each amount seperate to each other or are they joint debts?

 

If they are seperate they've just doubled the debt.

 

Thanks

 

D & D

Link to post
Share on other sites
paulwlton

paulwlton

Posted
Posted
Got another question.

 

We had 5 accounts with the bank. Mrs D had a Personal Current and I had a Personal Current, all the rest were Joint accounts.

 

The CCJ's were issued seperatley, 2 different claim numbers and slightly different amounts.

 

The CO's are also for slightly different amounts.

 

Does this mean that we owe each amount seperate to each other or are they joint debts?

 

If they are seperate they've just doubled the debt.

 

Thanks

 

D & D

 

Have you retained the paperwork from the judgments.?

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites
DandD

DandD

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Originally Posted by DandD viewpost.gif

Got another question.

 

We had 5 accounts with the bank. Mrs D had a Personal Current and I had a Personal Current, all the rest were Joint accounts.

 

The CCJ's were issued seperatley, 2 different claim numbers and slightly different amounts.

 

The CO's are also for slightly different amounts.

 

Does this mean that we owe each amount seperate to each other or are they joint debts?

 

If they are seperate they've just doubled the debt.

 

Thanks

 

D & D

Have you retained the paperwork from the judgments.?

 

Indeed we have

Link to post
Share on other sites
DandD

DandD

Posted
  • Author
Posted
sounds like they are different after all they cannot issue two claims for the same debt....can they?

 

The trouble is Penfold, that 4 of the account numbers in the 'particulars of claim' are the same on both. The only difference is our Personal Current Accounts.

 

D

Link to post
Share on other sites
paulwlton

paulwlton

Posted
Posted
The trouble is Penfold, that 4 of the account numbers in the 'particulars of claim' are the same on both. The only difference is our Personal Current Accounts.

 

D

 

In that case it seems like they've obtained a similar amount twice on both judgments. How appropriate, that is really adding value to the bottom line - to quote their own internal memo.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites
davefirewalker

davefirewalker

Posted
Posted (edited)

Theyre probably using "joint and severable"......ie they can get the money from either...or both (depends on who owns or has whatever money/property) they will only take what is owed...not double (unless they think they can get away with it :) )

 

I was in business in the late eighties and it went belly up. we had a £20,000 overdraft. I put the company into voluntary liquidation (we had no debts apart from tax and the bank) my fellow director did a bunk and I got landed with the whole amount not 50% as you would imagine.

 

Dave

Edited by davefirewalker

** We would not seek a battle as we are, yet as we are, we say we will not shun it. (Henry V) **

 

see you stand like greyhounds in the slips,

Straining upon the start. The game's afoot:

Follow your spirit; and, upon this charge

Cry 'God for Harry! England and Saint George!'

:D If you think I have helped, informed, or amused you do the clickey scaley thing !! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
paulwlton

paulwlton

Posted
Posted
Theyre probably using "joint and severable"......ie they can get the money from either...or both (depends on who owns or has whatever money/property) they will only take what is owed...not double (unless they think they can get away with it :) )

 

Dave

 

I assume this would be stated in the judgment?

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites
DandD

DandD

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Theyre probably using "joint and severable"......ie they can get the money from either...or both (depends on who owns or has whatever money/property) they will only take what is owed...not double (unless they think they can get away with it :) )

 

Dave

 

 

Dave

 

This is what I thought. But I've checked through all the court docs and it doesn't mention 'Joint and Several' anywhere. Also, it doesn't mention my name on any of Mrs D's docs or her name on any of my docs.

 

So technically, these must be 2 different debts. I think!!

 

D

Link to post
Share on other sites
davefirewalker

davefirewalker

Posted
Posted
Dave

 

This is what I thought. But I've checked through all the court docs and it doesn't mention 'Joint and Several' anywhere. Also, it doesn't mention my name on any of Mrs D's docs or her name on any of my docs.

 

So technically, these must be 2 different debts. I think!!

 

D

 

Hmmmmmmm

 

sounds like more dodgy dealing or the "F" word to me :)

 

Dave

** We would not seek a battle as we are, yet as we are, we say we will not shun it. (Henry V) **

 

see you stand like greyhounds in the slips,

Straining upon the start. The game's afoot:

Follow your spirit; and, upon this charge

Cry 'God for Harry! England and Saint George!'

:D If you think I have helped, informed, or amused you do the clickey scaley thing !! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
DandD

DandD

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I assume both judgments are under different claim numbers?

 

 

Hi Paul,

 

 

Yep, 2 different numbers. same day, same court, but the digits are 1 different.

 

D

Link to post
Share on other sites
paulwlton

paulwlton

Posted
Posted
Hi Paul,

 

 

Yep, 2 different numbers. same day, same court, but the digits are 1 different.

 

D

 

Well imo these are two separate claims with two separate amounts, i may be wrong, but then again this is RBS.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites
Penfold92

Penfold92

Posted
Posted

and they thought the bank charges cases were bad...wait till they get hit by fraud, dodgy dealings, processing subject data without permission and sharing info with third parties by 3 or 4 million people...LOL

 

Banks will close up and move country me thinks...

Link to post
Share on other sites
DandD

DandD

Posted
  • Author
Posted

thanks all

 

It now seems clear that the bank are either incompetent or just gits....probably both!

 

Anyway, here is a copy of the 2nd letter that we have had after our S.A.R.

 

We are just composing a letter to send to them. We'll post it here first for your thoughts in about 30 minutes.....

 

 

 

RRR23May20081.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...