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 reclaimed, however NRAM created a new loan number without ppi


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3762 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

I hope this is the right place to post this, if not please move to the appropriate place.

 

I had a succesful PPI claim from a well known bank, however, after the claim was paid out,

the bank then changed my loan account number without informing me.

 

To cut a long story short,

i phoned the bank to find out why the account number had changed.

 

They informed me that this was due to having to remove the PPI.

 

Ok no biggie i thought, however, i phoned the bank to get a copy of the Credit agreement for the loan i took out back in 2005.

 

I was informed they had 2 credit agreements on file, one for the previous account number and one for the new one.

 

I asked them to send me a copy of both agreements.

 

A few days later i received a copy of the agreement for the original loan account number,

at the top right of the agreement it states the loan account number.

 

They also sent me a letter that said a new agreement wasn't necessary as the remainder of the loan had been transfered to the new loan account

and had updated details of amount outstanding and APR.

 

The big question is does the new account they set up need a new credit agreement,

as the original credit agreement has the old loan account number on the front page?

 

I will be sending an SAR request for all document pertaining to the loan.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What should happen is that the original loan should have been restructured to remove the future, unpaid PPI from the account.

There should not have been a new account set up, purely a restructure of the old one.

 

On a restructure no new agreement is required.

 

I would press the bank on what they have actually done and if it turns out to be a restructure then all should be OK.

If they confirm in writing that they have a new agreement which you have not agreed to or signed then I think they are in a bot of trouble.

 

I would save the ten pounds for a SAR at the moment and write to them and ask them to put in writing what they have actually done.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, the letter sent to me from the bank states the following.

 

I can confirm that PPI was removed from the above reference (old loan account number)

and a new loan reference of xxxxxxxxx was allocated,

we did not issue new paperwork as this is a continuation of your original loan.

 

Doesn't mention about restructuring.

 

They couldn't even tell me how much i paid off,

 

i did request via letter however they only sent me what i had paid off from the new loan account number.

It struck me as odd when i phoned them about whether they have a copy of the loan agreement,

they checked on their computer and said they had 2 on file.

 

Looks like they will be sent another letter :-) still going to SAR them as well.

 

Anybody else had the same issue?

Edited by panzai345
updated
Link to post
Share on other sites

like to know how you signed that new agreement!!

 

whos the bank please

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

DX,

 

The bank in question is NRAM.

 

I presume they may have transfered the balance minus the PPI to the new loan account,

but dont understand why they would do that.

 

Why use a new account number?

 

What strikes me as odd is when i asked for a how much i had paid back since the inception of the loan,

they only sent me the figure i had paid from the new account number,

 

so if the new account number was a reference then it would have refered to my original loan agreement and they should then have sent me the correct figure.

 

I have been searching around about this but only managed to find this http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=3398520&page=1

Edited by panzai345
Link to post
Share on other sites

show me my signature on this new agreement NRAM...

 

cant?

 

oh!! whys that

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't worry about it.

 

Some loans are set up in a way that means they have to close it and open another one without PPI in order to remove the cover.

 

What matters is that you're not paying for it anymore.

 

The original loan agreement is still evidence of the rights and obligations of the two parties.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hortz,

 

I am aware of the obligations, i have acted in a fair and lawful manner by paying the loan. I hope NRAM are acting in the correct manner also. We shall see.

 

I wasn't suggesting that you hadn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Thought i would bump this as ther have been some developments,

 

after sending a few more letters and an SAR request

i received a letter back in relation to my SAR request stating the following.

 

"In relation to account number xxxxxxxxxxxxx ( my previous loan account number)

because you have settled this personal loan in xxxxxx 2013.

We retain only a limited amount of archived information"

 

Issue 1 ) this loan was not settled by myself,

issue 2 ) Surely they must have archived data for a loan that was still active in 2013?

 

Not only that, there is another loan account number referenced.

I have sent yet another letter asking for an explaination.

 

I smell a rat.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

keep scratching

 

 

this is beginning to smell.

 

 

the sar is a LEGAL document

 

 

you need to remind them

they have a legal right to retail documentation for at least 6yrs from last transaction. or settlement/closure

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Update,

 

After sending letter requesting copy of the credit agreement and previously missed out SAR data today i received a response,

jeez, it gets better and better.

 

The salient points if the letter state.

 

They did not have to send a copy of the credit agreement due to section 77 (3)

in a nutshell as the loan has been settled they dont have to send it,

they did send it however.

 

they have admitted the loan has been settled for the original account number

and that my loan is held in another account for administration purposes.

I did not settle the loan.

 

I think they have settled the previous loan by issuing a loan to clear the balance,

the new loan has been put into another loan account without my permission, signature or credit agreement.

 

Thoughts please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so as we guessed in august

 

show me the SIGNED agreement please

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

they cant do that.

 

Unless the new loan's agreement specifically references the old loan number and the fact that

the new agreement is solely created because PPI was removed and it run under the same T&C 's and period

they are stuffed.

 

as unless its signed by YOU its not legally binding.

 

typical welcome finance trick too.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
they cant do that.

 

Unless the new loan's agreement specifically references the old loan number and the fact that

the new agreement is solely created because PPI was removed and it run under the same T&C 's and period

they are stuffed.

 

as unless its signed by YOU its not legally binding.

 

typical welcome finance trick too.

 

dx

 

Hi Dx,

 

Where did you get the above information from as i need to send a response to their latest letter i received today.

 

Regards

P

Link to post
Share on other sites

consumer credit act.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you've never signed the new agreement

 

then is totally unenforceable.

 

they'd have to rely on the old onr.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

only because it was refinanced by the new one.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think IMS21 might like to comment further.....

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...