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

Logbook Loans-Some Success


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4572 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

Hi, I am brand new to this forum. I have had recent experience with Logbook Loans.

Approximately a year ago I took out a loan for £1000, and despite my best efforts to stay within the terms and conditions found it impossible to avoid their charges. After a few months I had such serious concerns about their conduct I arranged to borrow some money from a family member to settle the loan. This proved impossible to do however, as the staff at Logbook would not do a review of the charges until after I had paid them, and I just didn't have the confidence they would be reviewed fairly.

 

I continued to pay the loan, however this month I had listened to enough from Logbook and asked to speak to a manager.

To my surprise they put me through to one. I asked him to listen to the last 6 conversations and tell me his thoughts.

My point being that the staff manipulate situations, charge unfairly and most importantly the notes left are not a true testimony to the conversation, therefore any charge review cannot be done fairly.

 

After listening to the calls, he largely agreed with my points, and offered to wipe out all charges on my account, over £700,

 

I then asked him to consider allowing me to settle my loan at the figure it would have been when I requested, as though I had not been obstructed in my initial attempt. He agreed to this also.

 

I have been told by Logbook they keep all call recordings until the loan is paid off.

I really think a Subject Access Request is worthy of consideration as they will include all call recordings in this, as well as all notes made by staff, and internal e-mails. It is long-winded but only then can you present a complete picture of the way you have been treated. I think in many cases they will have difficulty defending their actions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ya

 

Sounds like you have had some success - but have you considered that the £700 charges applied to you account will have at the time of application attracted interest?... that interest may possibly still be on your outstanding balance........

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi,

 

Logbook confirmed no interest is added to their charges, however they are secured on the vehicle.

 

Today I received the Subject Access Request. Notes made by collections staff are minimal, usually only a few words.

Concerns made are seldom noted. A charge review can never be done fairly this way.

How can someone look at these and make an informed decision?

 

The SAR also included telephone calls.

The difference between the collections dialogue and their notes is huge.

 

I would urge everyone to make a SAR, then challenge the charges.

It worked for me, over £700 charges and another £660 interest refunded.

 

Got my spare key back today, what a great feeling!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...