Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Quick update. I've now recieved a letter before action from them with a form to return enclosed, still no credit agreement however. I assume just a case of following the other thread and returning form with no CCA as the reason?
    • Thanks for coming back and letting us know. Obviously we totally disagree with their decision.  Their remortgaging could only have gone wrong if they had ended up with a CCJ.  And how do you get a CCJ?  If you lose in court and then defy the court and don't pay.  Even if you lose in court, you don't get a CCJ as long as you pay within the 30 days ordered by the court.  Even had they lost in court the judge would have disallowed the interest and the £70 Unicorn Food Tax that PE made up.  There was no advantage whatsoever for giving in and paying now. But thanks to you for letting us know - a hell of a lot of users don't.
    • Hi everyone.   Before I say anything, TFL finally responded to the email I sent last week:   Thank you for your email, we acknowledge the signed documents you have returned in preparation for your hearing.   We note that this matter is causing you some stress and anxiety, however this is not a reason for TfL to discontinue proceedings. It is not unusual for passengers that have been summonsed to court to experience these symptoms, and we do have some empathy with your concerns.   However, as previously stated, TfL do not accept out of court settlements, and you will have the opportunity at your hearing, to provide your mitigation to the court prior to a decision being reached by them on how they intend to deal with this matter (usually a fine).   I am sorry that this decision is not more favourable.   Yours sincerely   James Vallis     At least he sounds more sympathetic in this email…   Only one week to go until the court hearing and I am so so nervous. I’ve prepared some questions and answers in preparation for what to say to the magistrate. It will help calm me down if I know roughly what to expect. If you could give feedback on it that would be great. If you have anything to add please do let me know.   As far as I know the court hearing will happen in these stages: Introduction and statement of facts Pleading guilty for the journeys I made with my mother’s card Penalty sentencing Appeal (if charged with a criminal record)   Am I guilty? Yes.   Why did I not pay the fare legally? Last year there was a lot going on in my life and I was struggling financially so to relieve some of this I used my mother’s Oyster card. I know it’s not an excuse and it’s still wrong.   Why do I not accept a criminal record? I really don’t want it to affect my chances of finding a job in the future. I will be the one earning money in my family so I am doing my best and studying hard to be able to get a good job. A criminal record would mean that regardless of how hard I’m working I won’t get the job I want after I graduate. This fills me with so much regret, sadness and disappointment in myself. I just want to be a good daughter for my mother because she’s already had to deal with many hardships in her life and I don’t want to make it any harder for her.
    • HI all, This is done now. My daughter and her fella are currently in the process of remortgaging so they just paid it out of panic. Thank you anyway DX
  • 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 Insurance - An interesting enigma


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4586 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

Here is an interesting little ditty that I hope someone has got the answer to.

When we were recently on holiday in the UK my wife bought herself a new car. I telephoned Saga (the Insurers of her old car) and transferred the details, so that the new car was Insured - No problem.

We carried on with the holiday and returned home two weeks later only to realise that the old car (which was sitting in our garden), was no longer insured. The motor tax on it runs up to the end of March 2012 and the MOT runs up to May 2012.

My wife seemed to think that there was no problem as the vehicle is behind a 6ft fence and quite secure. I advertised the vehicle for sale, and only then realised that it would not be legal for her or me to take the car on the road if anyone wanted to go for a test run before buying it.

The matter gets further complicated due to the recent changes in the law regarding all vehicles. Apparently now every car, whether on the road or off must carry motor insurance.

So what in heavens name should I do, insure the car for 12 months knowing that we are going to sell it, or leave it as it is knowing that we run the risk of breaking the law?

To put the vehicle on a SORN would be defeating the object to some extent, as we do not want to reclaim the Motor Tax, and in any event if it was on a SORN then there would be no chance of selling it because it could not legally be taken for a test run.

Can anyone offer any advice - please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea what law your referring to that insists vehicles must be insured whether on or off the road? AFAIK if it is kept on private property you don't need to have it insured, granted if you keep it on the public highway then you will need to insure it.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Greasmonkey, I thought the Law had changed, but my wife and I both have Comprehensive Insurance on two other cars, so does that mean we can drive the car that is to be sold on our Third Party Fire and Theft cover, or does it mean that the unwanted car must be insured no matter what?

It seems a complete nonsense if we have to insure the vehicle when we have no intention of using it.

The vehicle in question will remain locked behind 6ft gates.

Saga tell me that anyone wanting to test drive it can do so using the TPFT cover on their insurance, providing of course they have a fully comp policy on their main vehicle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was wondering about this new requirement to insure a car between end of use and sale

 

I get what they are trying to achieve in getting the morons who actually drive without insurance to pay up. But it seems to me that garages and dealerships will start doing a roaring trade in part exchanges at the expense of private motor sales as a result of people not wanting the hassle of sorning or expense of insuring an unused vehicle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be that the Authorities are trying to stop those idiots who drive without motor insurance, but what about those people like ourselves who buy a new car without part exchanging the old one, intending to sell the old car privately?

Being forced to insure the vehicle that is only intended for sale and nothing else, seems to be forcing people into an extravagance that in these hard times is unreasonable. I agree with Hamster 777 that this new rule may well give the motor trade more influence that it should rightfully have, and what about the likes of webuyanycar.com - who will be having a field day?

It may well be that the government 'bright sparks' who thought this new rule up had the best intentions, ie stopping uninsured drivers, but as with so many of these rapid-fire ideas, has knock-on side effects for innocent people who get caught-up in government trawl nets.

It just struck me that people like Lord Montague who have large private collections of motor cars will now be expected to insure every one of them for use on the road, alternatively they would have to be put on a SORN. Mind you, maybe people like Lord Montague can afford it whereas members of the general public cannot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

wrong from april it must be insured or sorned no matter where it is kept

 

RTFQ

SORN was introduced 31st January 1998.....touché..:fencing:

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that's that then, the car has now been insured to avoid Mr Plod knocking on the door.

Just another example of Blood Money having to paid out to avoid the penalties imposed by the bureaucratic dim-wits who govern us.

There should be an allowance made for people like us who have a car locked the their garage, or as in our case behind a 6ft fence, with no intention or need to use the vehicle on the roads. What use is it to SORN the vehicle if you intend to sell it imminently?

I can see a case for motor vehicle insurance companies to introduce a new class of insurance to cover one car being used and another off the road, pending the sale of the unused vehicle. So I hope Mr Direct Line, Mr Saga, Mr AXA, Mr Aviva, Mr Zurich, etc., etc., that you are reading this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are policies for laid up fire and theft only, with no third party risks, for garaged cars, however this doesn't get you around the sorn/wanting to sell the vehicle situation, as the RTA requires third party cover. You can also buy open policies, which offer easy transfer or as many who change vehicles often, motor trader policies. These come at a price though and don't really help your average punter.

Good question though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...