Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

PPI claim upheld - calculating redress


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4329 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

Hello!

 

My mother recently reclaimed her PPI payments from Barclaycard (it was an old LPF card) and it was upheld. The only issue I have is when running the figures through the spreadsheets you guys provide.

 

When I put the figures into the FosCISSheet I get one figure, but when I use the FOSRunningPPI sheet I get another amount. I'm just wondering which figure is more accurate as there is a large difference between the two.

 

For the record the account was opened in May 2004 and the last PPI payment was made in January 2007. The account was closed only a few months ago, but no PPI was deducted as the balance was low enough for this not to matter (I think it was 9p).

 

I assume the difference in figures is due to the interest not compounding, am I right?

 

 

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah OK. But would it make a difference if the account has been closed for some time? Because when I run the figures for my MBNA claim they come out remarkably similar on both spreadsheets (that card is still running).

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the account is closed and paid off you first complete the fosRunning sheet. You will then see that there are two figures, one being the original balance on the account at the time of settlement and the other being the reconstructed balance.

 

You work out the difference between these two balances and then work out 8% interest on that figure running from the date the account was paid off right up to the date of settlement. This spreadsheet will do it for you...just enter it as a one line entry

 

StatIntSheet v101.xls

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the problem here might be that on the account the Card balance in January 2007 was £0.09 (PPI payment £0) until it was paid off in March 2012.

 

So lets see if I have this right:

 

Original Balance at time of settlement - 0

Reconstructed balance - £369.84 (@ January 2007)

 

Or are the figures I'm looking for the last entries in Columns I and J on the FOS Running sheet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should be cols E and J.

 

What is the figure that they have offered as redress and the breakdown of it?

 

I'm off out in a bit but will have a look at your figures this evening

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK thanks for your very patient help anyway!

 

Column E - £0.09

Column J - £369.84

 

8% Simple interest on that gives £165.78, for a total of £535.53

 

on the letter sent:

 

Refund of Payments - £236.53

Refund of Interest - £94.45

8% Simple Interest - £121.57

 

Total - £452.55

 

hope that helps!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...