PPI Reclaiming discussion Part III

dreamer33

di3004 wrote: »

I dosed off, I had a cuppa got too comfy and nodded off.....:o , sorry if I have missed your posts folks.....:o

lol my son stole the laptop :eek: just got back on

dreamer33

pinknico wrote: »

POC is particulars of claim . Its how you state your case.

I will see what the fisa have to say.Thanks x:A

Not to sure yet, have been thinking about it all day mmmmmmmm

I know misrepresentation is gonna be in it defo, I was actually looking at the act today. Have also been looking at mcloaks posts about over reliance of docs.

Been on mcol today and I would need a whole website to state my case not just a little box.:rotfl:

Also I was thinking about the reasons why its took this long incase they come back with the limitations act.

Basically not sure how to state it but will work it out. Was trying to get my SAR in order today arghhhhh its a mess, I can't make out what came from FF and what came from FP.

di3004

dreamer33 wrote: »

lol my son stole the laptop :eek: just got back on

Snap..........:D lol...............apart from me nodding off as well......:o

maxdp

marshallka wrote: »

I have got a tracker til next month and then it goes to SVR and I don't think that all lenders are passing the 1.5% onto SVR. Have to wait and see. I really need this....:eek:

I cannot see them passing 1.5% on I know they should but I would be surprised. Or if they do they will make us wait for ages, Hope it works out for you

marshallka

dreamer33 wrote: »

Not to sure yet, have been thinking about it all day mmmmmmmm

I know misrepresentation is gonna be in it defo, I was actually looking at the act today. Have also been looking at mcloaks posts about over reliance of docs.

Been on mcol today and I would need a whole website to state my case not just a little box.:rotfl:

Also I was thinking about the reasons why its took this long incase they come back with the limitations act.

Basically not sure how to state it but will work it out. Was trying to get my SAR in order today arghhhhh its a mess, I can't make out what came from FF and what came from FP.

What are you going to say about the limitations act... its section 32 that says about concealment etc...


32.--

• (1) .... where in the case of any action for which a period of limitation is prescribed by this Act, either-
  • (a) the action is based upon the fraud of the defendant; or
  • (b) any fact relevant to the plaintiff's right of action has been deliberately concealed from him by the defendant; or
  • (c) the action is for relief from the consequences of a mistake;
• the period of limitation shall not begin to run until the plaintiff has discovered the fraud, concealment or mistake (as the case may be) or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it. ....
• (2) For the purposes of subsection (1) above, deliberate commission of a breach of duty in circumstances in which it is unlikely to be discovered for some time amounts to deliberate concealment of the facts involved in that breach of duty. . . . (5) Sections 14A and 14B of this Act shall not apply to any action to which subsection (1)(b) above applies (and accordingly the period of limitation referred to in that sub-section, in any case to which either of those sections would otherwise apply, is the period applicable under section 2 of this Act).

marshallka

maxdp wrote: »

I cannot see them passing 1.5% on I know they should but I would be surprised. Or if they do they will make us wait for ages, Hope it works out for you

Yeah I know, its so unfair and then they wonder why people fight back at them...:mad:

thanks maxdp...:D

di3004

Hey just a thought......:rolleyes: , as you know the FOS said on the letter they had wrote to Hamilton for me and just to wait to hear now which should be by 8 weeks, if not then get back to them (FOS).
Do you think the FOS would supply me with a copy of the letter they sent Hamilton?
And should I take it that the 8 weeks will be from the date on the letter dated 4th is to go from ?:rolleyes:

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

Hey just a thought......:rolleyes: , as you know the FOS said on the letter they had wrote to Hamilton for me and just to wait to hear now which should be by 8 weeks, if not then get back to them (FOS).
Do you think the FOS would supply me with a copy of the letter they sent Hamilton?
And should I take it that the 8 weeks will be from the date on the letter dated 4th is to go from ?:rolleyes:

I asked that too Di??

I asked if they wanted me to concoct my complaint to them about the rebate but was told when I telephoned the other day that they would write on my behalf and my comments about the rebate had been noted. I then thought it best not to confuse things again so I will just have to wait and see.

dreamer33

Just been reading the misrep act and I actually think I could have them for fraudulent misrep:

Fraudulent Misrepresentation
A fraudulent misrepresentation is a statement of fact made without belief in its truth either recklessly, knowingly or without caring whether it is true or false with the intention that it should be acted on and it is in fact acted upon.

Think the call I have proves this mmmmmmmm

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

I asked that too Di??

I asked if they wanted me to concoct my complaint to them about the rebate but was told when I telephoned the other day that they would write on my behalf and my comments about the rebate had been noted. I then thought it best not to confuse things again so I will just have to wait and see.

Yes I remember you saying now, so yep best leave it then just in case.;)

Wonder by the FOS writing on our behalf would help our case?
They obviously now the FOS have done the letters, and I suppose they would send a response to us as well as the FOS, what do you think ?
Or is it the case that the FOS just tells them to respond to us only perhaps?:rolleyes: