Cancel ANY insurance @ ANY time with ZERO fee's to pay

mickaveli2001

rs65 wrote: »

Well, chances are you would be correct once in this thread.

If anyone else is reading this whilst looking to avoid charges, please ignore everything the OP posts.

This doesn't make sense? So if someone is seeking remedy or a legitimate method that is within their lawful right to do so, they should ignore those that provide them with that information?

mickaveli2001

kingstreet wrote: »

I'm sorry I don't understand any of that.

I think law is designed that way deliberately. Most of that paragraph I posted was the definition from Bouviers law dictionary, but has slight differences in others

Aretnap

kingstreet wrote: »

I'm sorry I don't understand any of that.

It's all explained here.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Freeman_on_the_land

mickaveli2001

Aretnap wrote: »

It's all explained here.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Freeman_on_the_land

Putting your misleading attempt to disincline the thread with conspiracy theories, let's not neglect fundamental literature currently used by the courts, barristers and solicitors today - IE; to name a few - Stroud's judicial dictionary, Goode's commercial law, 5th edition of Halsbury's Laws of England, Stones Justices manual, materials all endorsed by the law society.


That nonsense you've linked come from a group who hold their entire allegiance to an outdated law dictionary called 'Blacks Law', which has little relevance today

rs65

mickaveli2001 wrote: »

This doesn't make sense? So if someone is seeking remedy or a legitimate method that is within their lawful right to do so, they should ignore those that provide them with that information?

There are rights under almost every contract of insurance to cancel. If anyone follows your advice and tries to do this by virtue of the CCA, they will be laughed at.

Your thread is entitled - cancel any insurance at any time with zero fees. You have not told anyone how to do so.

Your complaint to Barclays was not upheld. You got £100 because they didn't deal with it in time.

Where is the evidence that you can cancel at any time with zero fees? Answering this might help people.

mickaveli2001

Hi rs65. This was using 'out-of-the-box' methods not normally seen as conventional nor achievable so I wanted to provide evidence first. As you can tell, it doesn't usually receive a positive response. Whether that be due to unawareness or other reasons I'm not too sure. As mentioned earlier, my letter to Barclays was not a complaint, it was a notice of cancellation. This is how they categorize any judicious notice, so that there is no black and white affirmation of them recognizing the legalities contained within it, otherwise they would have to uphold the questions raised. Carelessly (but deliberately) corresponding as a 'complaint' allows an easier withdrawal, dodging relevant questions.


The original letter sent (in regards to Barclays) is here:

rudekid48

It looks to me that your basic ploy is to flag yourself in the "nutter with too much time on their hands" category.


Most businesses will take the view that the best way to deal with that category of customer is to do what needs to be done to make them go away as inevitably they just end up costing more money to correspond with than they are worth as a customer.


To be honest, spending "years" researching things just to save a few quid on the odd occasion that you might want to cancel a policy or service is not really a valuable use of time. I've cancelled a policy once in the last 20 years and it cost me £35 to do it so I'm not gong to lose any sleep over it.


If I had received that letter then in my eyes you would have lost all credibility within the first paragraph due to the immediate insult. The subsequent mix of further insults and garbled attempts at "legal speak" would place you firmly in the nutter category.

mickaveli2001

rudekid48 wrote: »

To be honest, spending "years" researching things just to save a few quid on the odd occasion that you might want to cancel a policy or service is not really a valuable use of time.

It has saved me approximately £8,000 in 3 years. I would beg to differ that that particular saving is certainly worth the investment, though agreed that it wouldn't have been if solely used for the purpose of 'just' insurance companies

Nearlyold

I would have thought with all your legal knowledge you would be putting forward a cogent legal argument in your letters rather than peppering your text with intemperate insults, they do you no credit at all I'm afraid.


Having said that you do realise your letter would have been passed round the whole department for everyone to read and laugh at - I don't say that to be nasty, it's just that you are kidding yourself if you think that businesses you write to cave in because they have been impressed with your outstanding legal arguments.

rs65

mickaveli2001 wrote: »

Hi rs65. This was using 'out-of-the-box' methods not normally seen as conventional nor achievable so I wanted to provide evidence first. As you can tell, it doesn't usually receive a positive response. Whether that be due to unawareness or other reasons I'm not too sure. As mentioned earlier, my letter to Barclays was not a complaint, it was a notice of cancellation. This is how they categorize any judicious notice, so that there is no black and white affirmation of them recognizing the legalities contained within it, otherwise they would have to uphold the questions raised. Carelessly (but deliberately) corresponding as a 'complaint' allows an easier withdrawal, dodging relevant questions.

Any expression of dissatisfaction has to be treated as a complaint. Your letter falls into this category. Your complaint was not upheld.

The only reason you got £100 was because they took too long to respond - nothing to do with any Act.