Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi I received a Parking Charge letter to keeper on Monday 15/04/24, the 17th day after the alleged incident. My understanding is that this is outside the window for notifying. The issue date was 08/04/2024 which should have been in good time for it to have arrived within the notice period but in fact it actually arrived at lunchtime on the 15th. Do I have to prove when it arrived  (and if so how can I do that?) or is the onus on them to prove it was delivered in time? All I can find is that delivery is assumed to be on the second working day after issue which would have been Weds 10//04/24 but it was actually delivered 5 days later than that (thank you Royal Mail!). My husband was present when it arrived - is a family member witness considered sufficient proof? 1 Date of the infringement  arr 28/03/24 21:00, dep 29/03/24 01.27 2 Date on the NTK  08/04/2024 (Date of Issue) 3 Date received Monday 15/04/24 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012?  Yes 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No    Have you had a response?  n/a 7 Who is the parking company? GroupNexus 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Petrol Station Roadchef Tibshelf South DE55 5T 'operating in accordance with the BPA's Code of Practice'  
    • lookinforinfo - many thanks for your reply. It would be very interesting to get the letter of discontinuance. The court receptionist said that the county court was in Gloucester 'today' so that makes me think that some days it is in Gloucester and some days its in Cheltenham, it was maybe changed by the courts and i was never informed, who knows if DCBL were or not. My costs were a gallon of petrol and £3.40 for parking. I certainly don't want to end up in court again that's for sure but never say never lol. Its utterly disgusting the way these crooks can legally treat motorists but that's the uk for you. I'm originally from Scotland so it's good that they are not enforceable there but they certainly still try to get money out of you. I have to admit i have lost count of the pcn's i have received in the last 2 yr and 4 months since coming to England for work, most of them stop bothering you on their own eventually, it was just this one that they took it all the way. Like i mentioned in my WS the the likes of Aldi and other companies can get them cancelled but Mcdonalds refused to help me despite me being a very good customer.   brassednecked - many thanks   honeybee - many thanks   nicky boy - many thanks    
    • Huh? This is nothing about paying just for what I use - I currently prefer the averaged monthly payment - else i wouldn't be in credit month after month - which I am comfortable with - else I wold simply request a part refund - which I  would have done if they hadn't reduced my monthly dd after the complaint I raised (handled slowly and rather badly) highlighted the errors in their systems (one of which they do seem to have fixed) Are you not aware DD is always potentially variable? ah well, look it up - but my deal is a supposed to average the payments over a year, and i dont expect them to change payments (up or down) without my informed agreement ESPECIALLY when I'm in credit over winter.   You are happy with your smart meter - jolly for you I dont want one, dont have to have one  - so wont   I have a box that tells me my electricity usage - was free donkeys years ago and shows me everything I need to know just like a smart meter but doesnt need a smart meter,  and i can manually set my charges - so as a side effect - would show me if the charges from the supplier were mismatched. Doesn't tell me if the meters actually calibrated correctly - but neither does your smart meter. That all relies on a label and the competence of the testers - and the competence of any remote fiddling with the settings. You seem happy with that - thats fine. I'm not.    
    • Evening all,   So today, I was sent an updated offer that includes the £12.60 I spent on letters, but they have declined to add the interest at £7.40. They have stating 'We acknowledge your request to claim interest to date, however, this would be at the discretion of a trial judge if the claim did proceed to a trial hearing.' I think I am content with this outcome, and pushing this to a trial for a total interest of £15.30 throughout the claim does not make sense to me.   What are people's thoughts? I am sure our courts have better things to concentrate on?
    • FFRSG3424ListofEvidencepdf-V1 2-merged.pdfFFRSG3424ListofEvidencepdf-V1 2-merged.pdf 2pages T&C,s UCM
  • 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

Car broke down 4 days after purchase, I want my money back!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4719 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

Hi. Is there anyone out there who can help??

 

I bought a 55 reg Ford Mondeo LX diesel from a second hand dealer. The next day black smoke started coming out when i put my foot on the accelarator. 4 days after purchase we took the car out for a drive on the motorway for the first time and the glow plug warning light came on, we lost power but managed to limp off of the motorway, lots and lots of steam started coming out of the back and we broke down on a busy A-road with my young baby in the back. We had to be towed home by RAC. As it was a sunday afternoon we had to wait until the next morning to contact the dealer, her told us to contact the warrenty co and they told us to take it into a garage for a diagnostic my dad towed me to a local Ford dealership. Ford diagnosed the problem a a worn turbo and possible further engine damage which couldn't be determined until the turbo had been fixed. The warrenty co had rejected the claim because Ford have said it's clearly an existing condition (have this in writing form the warrenty co and Ford will be providing us a diagnostic report stating that it's an existing condition). We've spoken to Consumer Direct for advice and told the dealer we want to reject the car and have a refund (either my old car returned plus the £950 we paid on top, or else the total cost of the Mondeo, £3250). He told us that because he's being, in his words, "helpful" in trying to get the car fixed (which he's not, he's just trying to push the warrenty co to pay so he doesn't have to) that he doesn't have to give us a refund. We've put in in writing to him that we want a refund and are now playing the waiting game.

 

Can anyone give any advice please? As I've said I have a young baby at home and being without a car is very stressfull. I just feel like we've been conned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The warranty is irrelevant here. You claim ia against the seller and as already pointed out, you should reject but you will need to put it in writing and send by recorded delivery. Come back if you need further help.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You must first give him a chance to repair the car for you. You cannot automatically reject the car. You can expect a loan car while yours is being repaired. Most reputable traders will do this for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You must first give him a chance to repair the car for you. You cannot automatically reject the car. You can expect a loan car while yours is being repaired. Most reputable traders will do this for you.

 

Yet again duff advice.

 

The car obviously has a major mechanical problem which, after just 4 days of ownership, is rejectable. However, yes, the OP could demand a repair if he so chooses but from his description, I would advise he rejects.

 

Consult Trading Standards for clarification of the SOGA OP to clarify the advice given in posts 3 & 4.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go again!!!!!!!!!

 

Need the Dragon on this one me thinks!!

 

Warranty will not be valid as there is usually a delay between point of sale and when it comes into affect. And.......the warranty is not a warranty but an insurance policy sold as a warranty. The two are disticntly different.

 

Something again the OFT needs to clamp down on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sam you will find the period of time at which point a person can reject a car has not been dictated in law. For instance the car may of travelled 500 miles in that 4 days. The seller may well agree to refund but could argue that in 500 miles the OP had opportunity to discover any major faults. But it is a grey area as to specifics in law and does need clearer guidance from SOGA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Need the Dragon on this one me thinks!!

 

 

You called? :)

 

Car was faulty at point of sale. Reject the car under the sale of goods act. Car is not fit for purpose bought. Ideally get the car back onto their premises and hand them the keys. Make an exact note of the time and date and ideally take a witness with you.

 

Having done that, give him 14 days to refund your money in full making it clear that are rejecting the car and will not accept a repair. Mark your letter 'Letter before action'.

 

If you don't receive your refund or a promise of such within 14 days, issue a CC summons immediately.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi , thanks for all the responses!

 

I like Dragons suggestion but unfortunatley the car isn't roadworthy and it's a bit of a distance (7 miles)to go on tow, especially as I found it so scary being on tow just the short distance to the Ford garage! In answer to some of the questions and comments, it was the first time I'd driven the car any distance and even then I didn't get all that far, probably got 40 miles before breaking down. Before that I'd only used it to pop to supermarket 2 miles away, that sort of short trip. There is no HP. I have sent him a letter by recorded delivery saying I reject and want a full refund and am waiting for a response.

 

The car broke down on 8th May. I've been on a website called "Sale of Goods Act Hub" and now have a better understanding of consumer law. A lot of people have said that he probably think he can bully me because I'm a woman but I'm going to hold my ground! Just hoping this is all sorted out before out holiday which we need a car for, otherwise will have to hire a car.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the car is un-driveable, did you indicate this in your rejection letter? I would of put something like; 'it is available to collect at your conveinence'. After all, if they had sold it correctly, it wouldn't of been un-driveable now would it?

 

If you do find yourself hiring a car, you may be able to claim the cost back under 'consiquentail losses' should you have to take the matter to court.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...