Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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
      • 160 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

Easier dying in 2007!


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2890 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

In 2007 Government presumably Labour, in Parliament agreed that a lass OR fellow living

ALONE could have savings of £16000 , HOWEVER, if they go together,married in one

householder. Then this total i.e £32,000 was reduced to just £16,000.

Move on to 2016 and these figures have not been changed.

Yes! the single person home still has enough permitted finance . BUT not the couple.

Before anyone says,but surely the couple have enough!

Costs have gone up dramatically, even if it is only funerals to consider.

So if any of my readers have parents, now is the time to ensure they are aware of this

ancient ceiling. Since, if they are now or could be on benefits of any kind - then going

over the limit can be costly. Being unaware of the maximim savings you or your parents

can hold will not stop severe penalities on discovery. Indeed the penalities can be

thousands. Where the money came from is immaterial - even if it was from recovery

after a crime! Burglarly card fraud for example.

We hear of cases of relations discovering shoe boxes of cash when clearing out their

deceased houses. Also parents being assisted by helpers, having cash stolen, then too

proud to tell relatives. Perhaps rare but neither the less heartbreaking incidents.

Personally I was below the permitted level, then repayment of stolen credit card money

+the interest+ my monthly payments - sent me over the limit. Irronically I'd been warned

that whilst a credit card company can repay the looted funds,SHOULD they later discover

any of the items should not have been compensated -they do claw back these payments.

If you have parents, or yourself, ensure you know the requirements,plus warn against

squirreling away cash at home. Obviously 'hidden' cash in banks is not secret from

Government though. Finally if you get a windfall, and are on Government support EVEN

if it is just A COUPLE of QUID - Tell them least they may think you have other money

stashed away. Readers query this last item - In my case it was £1.06 a month pension!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...