Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Peter McCormack says he has secured a 15-year lease on the club's Bedford ground.View the full article
    • ae - i have no funds to appoint lawyers.   My point about most caggers getting lost is simply due to so many layers of legal issues that is bound to confuse.  
    • Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same.   Yes.  But every interested buyer was offering within a range - based on local market sales evidence.  Shelter site says a lender is not allowed to wait for the market to improve. Why serve a dilapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease.   The dilapidations notice was a legal first step.  Freeholders have to give time to leaseholders to remedy.  Lender lawyers advised the property was going to be sold and the new buyer would undertake the work.  Their missive came shortly before contracts were given to buyer.  The buyer lawyer and freehold lawyers were then in contact.  The issue of dilapidations remedy was discussed..  But then lender reneged.  There was a few months where neither I nor freeholders were sure what was going on.  Then suddenly demolition works started.   Before one issues a s146 one has to issue a LBA.  That is eventually what happened. ...legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease   A s146 was served.  It took 3y but the parties came to a settlement.   (They couldn't revert as they had ripped out irreplaceable historical features). The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there.  That's not the case   One can ask for another extension.  In this instance the freeholders eventually agreed with a proviso for the receiver not to serve another. You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension.  Correct.  But receiver lawyer was an idiot.   He made so many errors.  No idea why the receiver instructed him?  He used to work for lender lawyers. I belatedly discovered he was sacked for dishonesty and fined a huge sum by the sra  (though kept his licence).  He eventually joined another firm and the receiver bizarrely chose him to handle the extension.  Again he messed up - which is why the matter still hasn't been properly concluded.   In reality, its quite clear the lender/ receiver were just trying to overwhelm me (as trustee and leaseholder) with work (and costs) due to so many legal  issues.  Also they tried to twist things (as lawyers sometimes do).  They tried to create a situation where the freeholders would get a wasted costs order - the intent was to bankrupt the freeholders so they could grab the fh that way.   That didn't happen.  They are still trying though.  They owe the freeholders legal costs (s60) and are refusing to pay.  They are trying to get the freeholders to refer the matter to the tribunal - simply to incur more costs (the freeholders don't want and cant's afford to incur)  Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to.... The property does not qualify under 67 Act.  Their notice was invalid and voided. B petition was struck out. So this is dealt with then.  That action was dealt with yes.   But they then issued a new claim out of a different random court - which I'm still dealing with alone.  This is where I have issues with my old lawyer. He failed to read important legal docs  (which I kept emailing and asking if he was dealing with) and  also didn't deal with something crucial I pointed out.  This lawyer had the lender in a corner and he did not act. Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been ....  Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at?   I could.  But the evidence is clear cut.  Receiver email to lender and lender lawyer: "our strategy for many months  has been for ceo to get the property".  A lender is not allowed to influence the receivership.   They clearly were.  And the law firm were complicit.  The same firm representing the lender and the ceo in his personal capacity - conflict of interest?   I  also have evidence of the lender trying to pay a buyer to walk.  I was never supposed to know about this.  But I was given copies of messages from the receiver "I need to see you face to face, these things are best not put in writing".  No need to divulge all here.  But in hindsight it's clear the lender/ receiver tried - via 2 meetings - to get rid of this buyer (pay large £s) to clear the path for the ceo.   One thing I need to clarify - if a receiver tells a lender to do - or not to do - something should the lender comply? 
    • Why ask for advice if you think it's too complex for the forum members to understand? You'd be better engaging a lawyer. Make sure he has understood all the implications. Stick with his advice. If it doesn't conform to your preconceived opinion then pause and consider whether maybe he's right.
  • 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

Appliances Direct refusing to refund payment for failed non-removal of old oven


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2570 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

Hello About 3 months ago the hinges on my oven door became faulty and it opened by accident and hit the kitchen floor damaging the outer glass window in my oven door.

The glass shattered similar to the way a car windscreen would but remained intact within the door.

 

I continued using the oven with no problem for a further couple of months (with the shattered glass still intact) until I ordered a new oven from Appliances Direct. On my online order I opted for the service to remove my old oven and paid a further £15 for this.

 

Prior to the delivery I removed my old oven and placed it in my hall. The glass was still intact but I covered it with newspaper and taped over it just as a precaution. On the day of delivery/removal I was working so my 20yr old daughter was there to let them in. They delivered the new oven then took the old oven out to the van to remove it but dropped it thus shattering the glass in the door. They then returned the old oven back to my house, apologised and refused to take it. My daughter called me immediately so I rang Appliances Direct to see what was happening.

 

They said it had been a failed collection due to customer error and broken glass being present. I complained that because they hadn't removed the old oven then I wanted a full refund of £15 or I gave them the option of returning and taking the oven away on a different day.

 

They refused both of these, I asked to be transferred to speak to the manager and they refused this also, eventually they offered to refund half of the cost as a good will gesture but I told them I'm not happy with this as I've lost out £7.50 plus I've still got the hassle of getting the old oven removed.

 

Anyway I'm at a standstill now and they are refusing anything else but on principle I'm not prepared to let it go. Has anyone got any advice as to the way forward please, I did threaten them with the ombudsman etc but it's had no impact.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted this 5 days ago but have not yet had a reply even though there has been just under 200 views. Have I posted it in the right section or would I be better off posting it elsewhere on the site.......................or am I missing something altogether. Can someone advise please, regards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How have you been dealing with the company - by phone - email or letter ?

 

 

It is probably best that you deal direct with their Head/Registered office. Send a formal complaint there in the first instance and ensure your letter is headed Formal Complaint.

 

 

You will need to give them at least 14 days to deal with your complaint properly, after which time you then have the choice of either the Ombudsman or the issuing of a small claim through the County Court.

 

 

Please do not simply "threaten" either one. If you say you will do something, then you need to follow through.

 

 

You might want to have a read of the CAG Complaints guide

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?439552-Guidance-note-Dealing-with-Customer-Service-Departments-or-making-telephone-contracts&highlight=Dealing+with+Customer+Service

 

 

Meanwhile, I will bring your thread to the attention of the site team.

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, 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.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply, yes I intend following it through, things like this that I regard as not being fair annoy me!! I initially spoke to them over the phone and they refused to accept that I had a valid point but offered half the collection money that I'd paid as a kind gesture. I asked to be put on to someone more senior but was refused so I ended the conversation. I then went down the email route and asked for a final letter from them so I could pursue it with the ombudsman. I got a reply initially but then further emails were ignored. I left it for a few days and asked about the £15 that they still owed me, I then received an email stating that £7.50 had been refunded. I've since emailed to say it should be £15 but I've not had a reply. I'll try and find their head office details and do what you advised thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

Hi OP,

 

I was just wondering if you ever got a final resolution on this, and what happened? I just had a similar thing with Appliances Direct as they sent me a damaged sink and then refused to refund my card, refused to pay the return shipping back, and also wanted to charge me a 25% restocking fee. I filed a formal complaint with Trading Standards and even called back to tell them so and their response was "Ok, we will await your letter by post and respond by post" - as if they are seasoned veterans with getting complaints!!! They are absolutely the most vile, disgusting "business" ever and I can't believe they would let me carry onto court for the sake of £130. Whatever happened to goodwill and good customer service? I simply asked for a replacement or a full refund to my card - I wasn't trying to get more out of them than I paid (though they should have compensated for all the hassle!). The only other option AD provided me was to refund me 50% of the sink, which obviously I wouldn't be able to use a damaged sink, even at half price!!

 

Thankfully, my purchase was protected by Google, which Google does for free for certain stores. I raised the complaint with Google as well and was assigned a case manager who contacted AD for me. AD gave them the same terrible response. LUCKILY, Google was very generous to tell me that if AD was offering me 50% of the cost back, that Google themselves would refund me the other 50% - and I'd keep the sink to dispose of at my leisure. This was a golden boon from Google as that saved me the return shipping and 10% restocking fee. I'm really impressed with Google, but I'm still going to file a formal complaint and make it well known on all of their social media and review sites how disgusting and amoral AD is.

 

Oh, and the icing on the cake - I openly heard in the background one of the AD sales team members make fun of an Indian guy for his accent, and they have NO accomodations for disabled people when I explained multiple times I have a leg injury and can't physically return the sink myself. So on top of all that they are both racist and discriminatory to disabled / injured people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...