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 
        • Like
      • 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.

Barclays / PPI

Dorabell

By Dorabell
in Payment Protection Insurance (PPI)

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3187 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 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

alanalana

alanalana

Posted
Posted

hello marjie,

 

Not sure on what grounds you would be claiming mis-sold PPI. Pre existing medical conditions, student etc etc a full list in some of the library templates.

 

I would however question the legality of the Agreement as it shows a name in the authorised signatory box but no apparent signature. I am not sure how legal that would be, to just type in a name and no proper signature.

 

You might want to ask a member of the site team to have a look and offer more advice on that.

 

aa

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

------------------------------------------------

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dorabell

Dorabell

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

[quote=alanalana;1712547,

 

Not sure on what grounds you would be claiming mis-sold PPI. Pre existing medical conditions, student etc etc a full list in some of the library templates.

 

I would however question the legality of the Agreement as it shows a name in the authorised signatory box but no apparent signature. I am not sure how legal that would be, to just type in a name and no proper signature.

 

You might want to ask a member of the site team to have a look and offer more advice on that.

 

aa

 

thanks for your reply:) thats what i thout about the signatory box? would i had to have signed and agrreed to the ppi i cannot remember signing any thing i have looked at the S.A.R there is no mentioned of any ppi i would have thout there should be my signature on the policy i hope i am making sense:?

Edited by Dorabell
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites
The GodMother

The GodMother

Posted
Posted

Hi Marjie

 

U have deleted the image so i cant see much but from what i have read it would seem kinda dodgy that you are being charged for PPI when u have not signed anything.

 

other than that is there any other reason why you would want to claim it back?

 

GM

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dorabell

Dorabell

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

 

U have deleted the image so i cant see much but from what i have read it would seem kinda dodgy that you are being charged for PPI when u have not signed anything.

 

other than that is there any other reason why you would want to claim it back?

 

GM

 

thanks GM sorry which one has been deleted

Edited by Dorabell
spelling mistake
Link to post
Share on other sites
The GodMother

The GodMother

Posted
Posted

all of them if u look above

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The GodMother

The GodMother

Posted
Posted

marjie the only one i can see is the one above so on the PPI side i can not comment.

 

masterloaninsurance4thpage.jpg

 

this is what it says when regarding the images.

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The GodMother

The GodMother

Posted
Posted

Marjie just why are u claiming this back.

 

Did they missell in any way as in you were not covered due to medical condition/ u were told u had to take or would not have the loan/card?

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dorabell

Dorabell

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
just why are u claiming this back.

 

Did they missell in any way as in you were not covered due to medical condition/ u were told u had to take or would not have the loan/card?[/quote

 

Thanks GM

if i can remember this application was done over the fone and if i can remember right this ppi was compulsary or i could not have had the loan its been so long ago, but there is nothing in the S.A.R about it just says on top of the print out statement that the isurance was added in the loan

Edited by Dorabell
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites
The GodMother

The GodMother

Posted
Posted

Well it does sound like misselling if they say you have to have or no loan. Also if you cant remember agreeing it but it is added then that is defo illegal.

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
alanalana

alanalana

Posted
Posted

Hello Marjie,

 

A little snippet from my links sticky above. I would suggest a Loan cannot be made the subject of the addition of PPI.

 

 

So what's the problem?

The problem is firstly that PPI bought from a lender is extremely poor value for money, with any potential benefits far outweighed by the huge cost.

Secondly, PPI is very often sold to people that can never claim on it. The terms are tightly drawn so that most of the instances where people hope to claim are not covered. Most policies don't pay if you are:

- Self-employed

- Retired

Or stop work because of:

- A medical condition you weren't asked about

- Stress or back problems

Only one in five claims on PPI are successful. There has also been evidence of firms forcing customers to buy it, wrongly claiming it's compulsory when it isn't or refusing to give a quote without it. There are even cases where the insurance has been added without the permission of the customer. In the worst cases, already expensive PPI is paid for up front and the money to pay for it is added to the loan you are taking out. This way of selling PPI, known as 'single premium', means that you end up paying interest on the cost of the insurance. When customers go to cancel the insurance they are told that it cannot be cancelled without recalculating the entire loan.

 

 

Taken from this link

Reclaim your PPI premiums - payment protection insurance | This is Money

 

Hope you find this useful:)

 

aa

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

------------------------------------------------

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
 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...