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
      • 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

Smile


western promise
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1871 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

Don't be inclined - go for it - they will pay; because they have to.

 

I have sent them a snotty note with a 7-day deadline via their online messaging system, on the basis that it is less hassle to me that way and any delay in payment simply results in my earning 8% interest.

 

The catch is that I cannot prove when I sent it nor guarantee it reaching the attention of someone able to comply with it. So, if they do not respond within 7 days, I will send a more detailed claim in hard copy to their head office with another 7 day deadline, then file online after that.

 

My OH actually has 2 current accounts, a Smile and a NatWorst because NatWorst was so awful. I plan to go after them in succession, in case either of them closes her account out of spite when they lose. I've a feeling the NatWest amount is going to be a lot higher.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Smile have now responded with a delaying message as follows:-

 

I'm afraid it is unlikely that we will be able to reply within 7 days as requested but we will respond about this issue within Finacial Services Authority guidelines (This is up to 8 weeks but usually much quicker).

 

Anyone have any views on this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to get you started again - but it will increase your post count :)

 

Would you mind just running through your claim again.

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

The charges that have been applied to your account aren't illegal and we are within our right to charge you. When you opened the account you agreed that if you exceeded your limit (regardless of the amount) that you would be charged, we state this very clearly in the terms and conditions so that there are no disputes in the future.

 

I understand that you feel the charges are excessive however we agreed that we would load £600 overdraft onto your account, if your balance exceeds this limit, the system will automatically charge you as you have broken the agreement with us.

 

Smile need to be seen as acting fairly and without favouritism, it wouldn't be fair to refund the full charge on your account as there are lots of customers this month that have been charged due to similar errors and received no refund.

 

I'm sure if you checked with the Office of fair trading that they would agree with us, if you exceed your limit and use unauthorised borrowing (regardless of the amount) we are within our rights to charge you.

 

If you would like to escalate this complaint please write to,

 

FAO: customer care

smile

P.O Box 600

Delf house

Skelmersdale

Lancashire

WN8 6GF

 

Unfortunately I'm unable to refund the full charge as there is no bank error.

 

 

Why can't all banks respond like this :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

WesternPromise:-

What rubbish. What has the FSA got to do with it?

 

You now need to say that you will be escalating the complaint directly to the County Court in 7 days and you will not be passing Go!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 13 years later...

This topic was closed on 03/05/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support their.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1871 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...