Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
  • 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 mechanic problems!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2552 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 there,

 

I have several issues with the work my mechanic has carried out.

I paid by credit card an amount of approx £1500 for the job.

I want to sue for wasted time, costs of repair (done by another mechanic as a result of poor workmanship),

costs of insurance paid for on another car because my car was not driveable and related expenses.

 

I have already tried to reason with the mechanic and after him first ignoring me,

I got him to respond to my email and we were emailing back and forth.

 

He eventually sent a what he described as a "full and final response".

 

Most of his response was either factually incorrect, pure ignorance of clear facts or illogical.

He is pretty much denying all fault.

He offered a final settlement which was a laughable amount considering the actual cost of his poor workmanship.

 

My question is,

should I go the charge back route first to claim some of the money or straight to a section 75

or is there another route that is better?

 

I have his full and final response as mentioned above and was planning to annotate this on MS Word with my comments.

 

Please advise!

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 451
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

It would help if you gave us a few more details of the problems you encountered and why you took it elsewhere ?

 

 

S75 is not as simple as submitting a claim and the money returned, they do contact the other person and get their side of the story.

Also the card provider is more than likely to give you false and / or misinformation in the hope you will believe you don't have a claim or you've run out of time etc.

 

 

What do you have in the way of hardcopy to prove what you asked for and he quoted ?

Edited by Conniff
Link to post
Share on other sites

"details of the problems you encountered and why you took it elsewhere ?"

 

When I received the car back from him it was not fully working as he promised it would be

and he said he did not know why but he thought it was a software issue.

He also at this time, revealed to me that "software" is "out of his comfort zone" so I should never have expected him to be very proficient in this area,

I told him that "it would have been useful to know that before I gave you the car".

I took the car back, it was running very rough and I had no real idea what was wrong with it.

 

 

Another issue with the car was that after a few miles of driving,

the air intake started to come apart from the car,

causing an air leak in the system which means the car will run very rough.

 

Another issue was that, before I took possession of the car, he reported to me via a phone call that the car was running rough

and he did not know why.

 

 

I have some knowledge about these thing so I told him to check the MAF sensor

(if this is not working properly it often confuses the car and causes it to run rough). he said he checked this and it was fine.

 

 

I checked it later myself just for completeness because after trying a couple of things, the car was still not running right.

I plugged my computer into the car and read the errors on the car.

It came up with an issue with the IAT sensor (which is attached to the same part as the MAF sensor, they are both contained within one small unit) and what do I find?

there was some wiring and an electrical component missing from it, hence it was not fully working and therefore causing the car to run rough.

 

when he checked the MAF sensor upon my instruction, he should have seen this bit or wiring and electrical component missing

and then known straight away that this was the reason for the fault.

 

 

I am an amateur and I could tell, and this was only because on the actual sensor, it had a wiring diagram on the plastic

below where the wiring should have been. so I knew something was missing.

 

 

I swapped the MAF sensor (and IAT sensor because they are both contained in the same unit) with a working one and the rough running disappeared.

 

another issue I had was with the brakes,

the brakes were very very soft and spongy from the day I took the car off him.

 

 

i thought it was because of the rust that has built up on part of the front brake discs because that part had been unused for a while

due to the fact that I previously had racing brakes fitted which did not use this part of the disc.

I thought that once this rust had been worn off by the replaced brakes, the brakes would work fine.

I gave it quite a few miles of driving with very poor brakes before I realised that it wasn't the discs,

it was that there must be air in the braking system.

 

I took the car to another mechanic (known BMW specialist) to have fixed and he bled the brakes and noted that there was air in the braking system.

 

another issue I had about a week ago was that the fuel pipe from the back of the engine popped out by itself.

this resulted in a significant amount of fuel being dumped on the road (obviously very dangerous)

and my car cutting out and not being able to restart.

 

 

I called the AA and he diagnosed and fixed the problem.

this would have been something that was detached and reattached as part of the repairs done by the mechanic with whom I have a dispute.

 

 

luckily for me, I have AA Gold road cover and they fixed the issue swiftly.

the AA mechanic mentioned that the pipe was probably just not connected back properly

because it should clip on-he thought it probably just wanted clipped back on properly initially.

 

why I took i elsewhere? simply put, I have zero trust in the mechanic I took it to initially.

I have taken a few of my cars to him over the years and he has been good

but recently his work has been going down hill-perhaps he is taking my custom for granted, I don't know.

 

 

the last car I took to him, it took them 3 attempts to fit 2 parking sensors properly.

he didn't seem to care much that I have to take time out of my life to travel back and forth from his workshop.

he just says "bring it back and we will take a look at it", as if I have the time to be going back and forth.

its approx. 25 min drive each way and he is only open on weekdays.

 

also, with the current car, the first job he did on it was swapping the door lock for a working one.

again, a day or so after taking the car back from him after he did this, it wasn't working right.

he fixed this when I took the car back to him for the bigger job for which I wish to sue (above).

 

"S75 is not as simple as submitting a claim and the money returned, they do contact the other person and get their side of the story. Also the card provider is more than likely to give you false and / or misinformation in the hope you will believe you don't have a claim or you've run out of time etc.

 

"I have a "full and final response" from the mechanic-90% of which is lies or delusion.

I can disprove 90% with simple facts backed up by physical evidence (mostly) and just plain logic.

So, I have the "other side of the story" in a formal letter.

 

"What do you have in the way of hardcopy to prove what you asked for and he quoted ?

 

"pretty much yes, it appears to mostly be in the "full and final response" I have from the mechanic and my invoice.

I think, those two combined, cover everything.

 

 

question-should I do a chargeback on the two items for which I can claim through this process first,

get the money and then under s75 claim for the rest.

 

 

the reason I suggest this method is because the fact that I've been rewarded money via a chargeback would help my case under s75.

that's my amateur thinking anyway.help?!thank you!

Edited by SabreSheep
formatting
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have proper written bills from the second garage that you can use as proof he did not act in a professional manner, then yes, go ahead with the S75. As I said earlier, expect some grief from the bank as they don't like doing it, but stand firm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

as far as I'm aware....section 75 wont get you any consequential losses.

and you cant do chargeback on a credit card.

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

as far as I'm aware....section 75 wont get you any consequential losses.

and you cant do chargeback on a credit card.

 

 

dx

 

don't think the chargeback comment is correct...I've done a chargeback on CC before.

 

ok thanks. how exactly do i go about making an s75 claim?

 

and should i claim under a chargeback first as this easier and will establish guilt if i win my claim. ideas?

 

helpppp!

Link to post
Share on other sites

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

First, are you ready to make the claim, ie, do you have all your paperwork together and does it show that the first garage made a bodge of it all ?

 

 

Are you claiming back the full amount, and if so, are there any parts on the car that the first garage supplied ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the best approach would be to submit your claim to the bank first relying on s75, together with the supporting documents. This route is cheaper because you won't have to pay any court fees. The bank should be able to inform you of the process.

 

If that does not get you the result you are hoping for, then the next stage would be to start a small claim.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

thankswhat £ rate per hour can I claim for compensation of lost time?

 

for example, lost time waiting for AA guy was say 2 hours,

 

what £ amount per hour can I claim as compensation?

 

is it to do with how much I earn or does some sort of "standard" rate apply?

Link to post
Share on other sites

To get compensation for wasted time you'd normally be expected to prove that the wasted time this has caused you financial loss. This is very difficult to do. You could try if you are self-employed but otherwise I'd probably leave it out.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...