Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

claiming over £2250in Scotland


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6246 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

Like you am looking at a sum of over £750, I have found the Scotland board valuable. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=71

 

 

See if there is anything over there that might be of specific help. They also mention the govan law site ... http://www.govanlc.com/

 

am trying to get as much info as I can. It seem so unfair the diffences in the law between Scotland and England/Wales, with regard to the small claims issues, however there might be change on the horizon.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was, and still am considering summary cause for my next claim. Here is advice from Robertxc

 

Originally Posted by Robertxc

Probably not. Things definetly get more complicated in Summary Cause, and you won't be protected from paying costs if you lose, and those could be well into four, if not five, figures.

 

In my experience, the Sheriff will give you a lot of help in Small Claims, because it's intended for people who are representing themselves. Summary Cause is intended for lawyers, so you will find the Sheriff much less tolerant if you get the procedures wrong. The risk of having your cased kicked out is much higher in summary Cause. Also, bear in mind that one of the main reason that the banks don't defend these actions is because there is no way for them to recover their costs if they win (in Small Claims). If you do it in Summary Cause, then that disincentive no longer exists...

Bank of Scotland round 1: £740 + costs settled, still sore over the 8% grrr

Bank of Scotland round 2: £629 +101.15 interest +£39 costs settled.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck.... my claim will be over the two grand mark , so summary cause is no good. Think will divide the claims into years ..

 

Keep posting and let us know....

 

I have been following fruitycars story over on the Scotland board.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...