Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • Hi again all, below is another email they sent me, I just don't want to get in trouble or things to get worse with this crowd but I am taking your advice here. Anyway advice would be appreciated.   I am contacting you again after having tried to contact you both by email on 03/04/2024 and 10/04/2024, and by telephone on 10/04/2024 and 17/04/2024 to discuss the matter in relation to the regularization of the SOLIDWORKS case against xxx our company.   This is an urgent legal matter. Please contact me at your earliest convenience - +44 2921 920 296.    If we do not recieve a response before 24/04/2024, we will assume that you are not willing to settle this dispute amicably. The case will then be referred back to our client with whom, ultimately, the final decision lies on the enforcement of their intellectual property rights.    Yours sincerel y, Rhys
    • If you do get a letter of Claim and or Pre Action Protocol pack 15. Where there has been non-compliance with a pre-action protocol or this Practice Direction, the court may order that (a) the parties are relieved of the obligation to comply or further comply with the pre-action protocol or this Practice Direction; (b) the proceedings are stayed while particular steps are taken to comply with the pre-action protocol or this Practice Direction; (c) sanctions are to be applied. 16. The court will consider the effect of any non-compliance when deciding whether to impose any sanctions which may include— (a) an order that the party at fault pays the costs of the proceedings, or part of the costs of the other party or parties; (b) an order that the party at fault pay those costs on an indemnity basis; (c) if the party at fault is a claimant who has been awarded a sum of money, an order depriving that party of interest on that sum for a specified period, and/or awarding interest at a lower rate than would otherwise have been awarded; (d) if the party at fault is a defendant, and the claimant has been awarded a sum of money, an order awarding interest on that sum for a specified period at a higher rate, (not exceeding 10% above base rate), than the rate which would otherwise have been awarded. https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct   .
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5533 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

Ok here is a good one for you.

 

I use Autodirect for my insurance, I have for years. I also take out the auto direct rescue cover as I get it discounted. On Xmas Day at around 10.30pm my car broke down. No worries, Ill ring out the breakdown cover. So away I went with my little laminated card and rang the number expecting a wait and then off home. The number advised they were closed. Hmm puzzling?

 

Anyway I tried from another mobile, same response. In the end I had to leave the car and tried the next day to get recovered. They were closed. I must add that it was freezing, I was alone, it was a dark motorway outside Durham, late and nobody around virtually. I had no funds to call out someone else and a good samaritan picked me up two hrs later and dropped me off home.

 

I got sorted the next day and did try the same number. Same response.

 

Out of puzzlement I called on the Monday after and got the message....Welcome to Autodirect...please select one of the following options. Hmmmm. Very strange. I then told them Id broken down, they guy prceeded to laughat me and tell me Id called the wrong number and gave me a different one.

 

Now I emailed a Complaint about this. I got back the following:

 

A Breakdown Policy for a Megane issued in June 2008 with a number in small illuminated print. Yup it worked.

 

A Recovery Booklet with an attached thin card and the number on it. (never seen this before) They said they sent this to me in June 2008.

 

Whats wrong with the above? I dont drive the Megane anymore, that car was scrapped in October 2008. None of the documents were kept at all, apart from the necessary sign off forms.Where was the updated policy for my MG?

 

I received the following items on upgrading the car insurance:

 

Certificate

DD Confirmation

Excess Statement

Key Facts Booklet

Laminated Card

 

I did NOT get a Recovery Booklet, a recovery policy schedule nor this so called card.

 

Ive dug around, I even have a claims card from August 2008 with the same wrong number on!!

 

They are saying they havent done anything wrong, that I had the information to hand and could have checked my recovery policy statement at any time. I was in the middle of nowehere, by all means I had my insurance, licence and car user manual and also MOT just incase. Of course Id read all the way through the small print to find the number.

 

They gave me an official card, which looks BETTER than the thin one they sent via my Complaint. It had a Claims number on, customer service number on, renewals and then at the bottom a breakdown number.

 

Am I being stupid in assuming that they have done wrong? Or am I being pedantic here? I was put in a difficult situation, I thought I was fine, I mean I typed the numbersd into both my phones for safety. They looked official and I had no reason to doubt.

 

Wat do I do?:mad:

ARGH COMPLAINTS!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...