Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Post #415 you said you were unable to sell it yourself. Earlier I believe you said there had been expressions of interest, but only if the buyer could acquire the freehold title. I wonder if the situation with the existing freeholders is such that the property is really unattractive, in ways possibly not obvious to someone who also has an interest in and acts for the freeholders.
    • i dont think the reason why the defendant lost the case means anything at all in that case. it was a classic judge lottery example.
    • Hello, I will try to outline everything clearly. I am a British citizen and I live in Luxembourg (I think this may be relevant for potential claims). I hired a car from Heathrow in March for a 3-day visit to family in the UK. I was "upgraded" to an EV (Polestar 2). I had a 250-mile journey to my family's address. Upon attempting to charge the vehicle, there was a red error message on the dashboard, saying "Charging error". I attempted to charge at roughly 10 different locations and got the same error message. Sometimes there was also an error message on the charging station screen. The Hertz 0800 assistance/breakdown number provided on the set of keys did not work with non-UK mobiles. I googled and found a bunch of other numbers, none of which were normal geographical ones, and none of which worked from my Luxembourg mobile. It was getting late and I was very short on charge. Also, there was no USB socket in the car, so my phone ran out of battery, so I was unable to look for further help online. It became clear that I would not reach my destination (rural Devon), so I had no choice but to find a roadside hotel in Exeter and then go to the nearest Hertz branch the following day on my remaining 10 miles of charge. Of course, as soon as the Hertz employee in Exeter plugged it into their own charger, the charging worked immediately. I have driven EVs before, I know how to charge them, and it definitely did not work at about 10 different chargers between London and Exeter. I took photos on each occasion. Luckily they had another vehicle available and transferred me onto it. It was an identical Polestar 2 to the original car. 2 minutes down the road, to test it, I went to a charger and it worked immediately. I also charged with zero issues at 2 other chargers before returning the vehicle. I think this shows that it was a charging fault with the first car and not my inability to do it properly. I wrote to Hertz, sending the hotel, dinner, breakfast and hotel parking receipt and asking for a refund of these expenses caused by the charging failure in the original car. They replied saying they "could not issue a refund" and they issued me with a voucher for 50 US dollars to use within the next year. Obviously I have no real proof that the charging didn't work. My guess is they will say that the photos don't prove that I was charging correctly, just that it shows an error message and a picture of a charger plugged into a car, without being able to see the detail. Could you advise whether I have a case to go further? I am not after a refund or compensation, I just want my £200 back that I had to spend on expenses. I think I have two possibilities (or maybe one - see below). It looks like the UK is still part of the European Consumer Centre scheme:  File a complaint with ECC Luxembourg | ECC-Net digital forms ECCWEBFORMS.EU   Would this be a good point to start from? Alternatively, the gov.uk money claims service. But the big caveat is you need a "postal address in the UK". In practice, do I have to have my primary residence in the UK, or can I use e.g. a family member's address, presumably just as an address for service, where they can forward me any relevant mail? Do they check that the claimant genuinely lives in the UK? "Postal address" is not the same as "Residence" - anyone can get a postal address in the UK without living there. But I don't want to cheat the system or have a claim denied because of it. TIA for any help!  
    • Sars request sent on 16th March and also sent a complaint separately to Studio. Have received no response. Both letters were received and signed for.  I was also told by the financial ombudsman that studio were investigating but I've also had no response to that either.  The only thing Studio have sent me is a default notice.  Any ideas of what I can do from here please 
    • Thanks Bank - I shall tweak my draft and repost. And here's today's ridiculous email from the P2G 'Claims Dept' Good Morning,  Thank you for you email. Unfortunately we would be unable to pay the amount advised in your previous email.  When you placed the order, you were asked for the value of your parcel, you stated that the value was £265.00. At this stage the booking advised that you were covered to £20.00 and to enhance this to £260.00 you could pay an extra £13.99 + VAT to fully cover your item for loss or damage during transit, you declined to fully cover your item.  Towards the end of your booking on the confirmation page, you were then offered to take cover again, to which you declined again.  Unfortunately, we would be unable to offer you an enhanced payment on this occasion.  If I can assist further, please do let me know.  Kindest Regards Claims Team and my response Good Afternoon  Do you not understand the court cases of PENCHEV v P2G (225MC852) and SMIRNOVS v P2G (27MC729)? In both cases it was held by the courts that there was no need for additional ‘cover’ or ‘protection’ (or whatever you wish to call it) on top of the standard delivery charge, and P2G were required to pay up in full for both cases, which by then also included court costs and interest. I shall be including copies of both those judgements in the bundle I submit to the court next Wednesday 1 May, unless you settle my claim (£274.10) in full before then. Tick tock…..    
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Tesco trolley hit my car - car ins is with Tesco's


scarlet
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6528 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 have also started this thread in General - not sure which was best place to put it.

 

 

Can anyone give me advice?

 

My car was hit by a Tesco Trolley on the weekend. It has a huge dent.

Noticed that all the trolley bays were overflowing and there were clumps of trolleys situated all over the car park and not a Trolley person to be seen.

 

Off I went into the store and asked for the Manager. He came out inspected my car took me back in store and took my details. Then along came a stuck up *$"& and told me Tesco do not accept liability. I said I would fight hard to try and get them to accept liability (this would cost me £150 plus two years no claims) she then said scaristically "Best of Luck".

 

My arguement with the store is that there were trolleys all over the car park and there was no trolley person there. She told me that he was probably around the side of the building. One trolley person at a Tesco Extra on a Friday teatime. They are having a laugh! I videoed and took photos of the car park and trolleys.

 

Mt car insurance is with Tesco so I put in a claim Friday evening and was told that it is very unlikely that Tesco Insurance will support my claim as there is no negilance on the supermaket.

 

Can this be right, I have proof that the trolleys had not been collected and Im sure they have CCTV footage of what happened. Has anyone ever claimed against a supermarket and won? Do you think it is worth going it alone without the support of the insurance company? Are Tesco insurance only saying that they will probably not support me because it is Tesco Supermarket I want to sue.

Is it worth trying to get the CCTV footage - find the driver and sue him/her or is that a bit far fetched?

Halifax Data Protection Act requested 5/4/06

Prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £2299.00

£219.00 offer 20/5/06

LBA sent 22/5/06

Moneyclaim filed 5/6/06:) Settled in full

 

Barclays prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £150

LBA sent 22/5/06

Moneyclaim filed 5/6/06:) Settled in full

 

Barclaycard 1 prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £100

LBA sent 22/5/06

£50 rec'd back

Last request for remainder 5/6/06 :)Settled in full

 

Barclaycard 2 prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £160

LBA sent 22/5/06

Last ditch attempt letter sent 5/6/06 :)Settled in full

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure where you would stand legally as many car parks have disclaimer notices to say they won't accept liability for any damage to your vehicle etc so you are basically parking there at your own risk.

 

Another thing to add is that you state your car has a "huge dent" - if this is the case then to me that would suggest the damage was caused by something more substantial than a single stray trolley hitting your car - it would hav either been a trolley full of shopping which somebody has bumped into your car, or even that another vehicle has hit your car. (I may be wrong but I just don't think an empty trolley would cause a "huge dent").

 

I assume you did not see the incident? If so, what makes you so sure it was a trolley. Please provide as much detail as possible so we can assist.

 

I have closed the duplicate thread you made elsewhere - please stick to one thread.

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I am aware notices that state no liability are not worth the paper (or whatever) they are printed on!! The supermarket have a responsibility to ensure that they look after their customers. It is the same with signs at dry cleaners saying they will accept no liability for damage how so ever caused. If you can show negligence then you have a case against them, the sign will not hold up in court!

 

At the same time you would have to show that they were negligent in not looking after their trolleys. While I agree it is unlikely that one trolley would cause the damage you speak of possible several together could do so.

 

You mention you would like to try and find the driver which one?

 

Were there any witnesses? Have you taken photos of the damage?

 

 

Woolfie?

Advice & opinions given by Woolfie are my own, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your quick reply Barracad, I know it was a trolley that hit the car as it was still against it when I returned. The only explanation for the size of the dent is that it must have hit on impact and quite a speed. On Friday evening it was extremely windy and the car park is slightly sloped (only slightly). As I approached the car from the distance it looked like the trolley was in the next parking space but as I got closer I realised it was right up against it. I had parked towards the back of the car park like I always to do. I try and park away from other cars so that my car is not in a position where other car doors or trolleys scratch against it. Dont get me wrong I dont own a flash car it is only a KA but I have looked after it and I don't want it damaged. i have consideration for other peoples cars but not all people are like me. Therefore I know it was a Trolley. It is a person (not a driver sorry bookworm) that left the trolley there and I am just angry that Tesco have not got adequate staff on shift to tackle the problem.

Halifax Data Protection Act requested 5/4/06

Prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £2299.00

£219.00 offer 20/5/06

LBA sent 22/5/06

Moneyclaim filed 5/6/06:) Settled in full

 

Barclays prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £150

LBA sent 22/5/06

Moneyclaim filed 5/6/06:) Settled in full

 

Barclaycard 1 prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £100

LBA sent 22/5/06

£50 rec'd back

Last request for remainder 5/6/06 :)Settled in full

 

Barclaycard 2 prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £160

LBA sent 22/5/06

Last ditch attempt letter sent 5/6/06 :)Settled in full

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right with regards to the disclaimers being pointless.

 

First of all, you say the trolly park was overflowing... The trolley that hit your car, did that come from a trolley park?

 

If yes, did the trolley park have these "speed bumps" at the entrance to it?

 

I feel that if the answer to the first question is yes, but the 2nd is no, then you should have a case against Tesco.

 

If the trolley did not come from a trolley park, but was left by a customer, then I feel that you dont really have a case from Tesco, as they were not negligent. They do not have a legal requirement to put these trolley parks in the car park. They put them there for shoppers convenience. However, if it was there then they do have to put safeguards down that they dont damage vehicles - eg the speedbumps.

 

As for chasing the person who left the shopping trolley there, If it was not left in a trolley bay then you do have a case. However, you would really only get youtr money back if the person had Contents Insurance, & it would take a lot of time trying to find the owner of the trolley, etc.

 

Hope this helps

Abbey - owed £3260 - Paid up.

 

Barclays owed £2500 - Paid up.

 

Halifax, Mint & Egg - next on the hit list

 

Dont click on the scales - I'm quite proud of my little red dot! - As the little red dot has gone - click away!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for all your replys.

 

The latest is that we have found someone to do the body work who is reasonable and we have decided to not claim through our insurance. However I will be seeking reimbursement from Tesco Supermarket as my insurers have said they probably would have supported us if I had photographic and cctv footage. Therefore I will be writing to Tesco with the evidence I have and requesting footage if any. It is worth a try.

Halifax Data Protection Act requested 5/4/06

Prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £2299.00

£219.00 offer 20/5/06

LBA sent 22/5/06

Moneyclaim filed 5/6/06:) Settled in full

 

Barclays prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £150

LBA sent 22/5/06

Moneyclaim filed 5/6/06:) Settled in full

 

Barclaycard 1 prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £100

LBA sent 22/5/06

£50 rec'd back

Last request for remainder 5/6/06 :)Settled in full

 

Barclaycard 2 prelim letter sent 5/5/06 for £160

LBA sent 22/5/06

Last ditch attempt letter sent 5/6/06 :)Settled in full

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose contributory negligence, but they could argue that there is a big place for the trolleys to go at the front of the supermarket...

 

Then probably settle out of court!

Abbey - owed £3260 - Paid up.

 

Barclays owed £2500 - Paid up.

 

Halifax, Mint & Egg - next on the hit list

 

Dont click on the scales - I'm quite proud of my little red dot! - As the little red dot has gone - click away!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...