Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • 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 xx/xx/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 xx/xx/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, xx/xx/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.
  • 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

faulty laptop 3yrs on with extended warranty - won in court against Comet !!


KOGE19
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4784 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 All,

 

I bought a laptop more than 3 years ago from a retailer with a 3 year extended warranty. During the warranty the laptop was repaired 4 times for recurring faults.The warranty is now over and the laptop has failed(non-working). I send an email to the head office of the retailer and they disagreed to fix it as per SOGA - They want me to pay to get it fixed now. I bought the laptop on a credit card(HSBC).

 

I would like to know if someone could provide me any help on the following:

 

1) Is there anything specific I need to get the independent evaluator(the company which would evaluate the failure of the laptop and write the report) to check so that the judge would be able to make a decision in the small claims court. The laptop has a failed motherboard and the retailer has mentioned this in their letter - they have not mentioned any misuse on my side, as a reason for the failure - do I still need to get an independent evaluator's report?

 

2) If I do have a independent evalutors report - would I be able to send it along to HSBC and ask them to do a charge back as per the consumer credit act - is there any hope in me trying this option out. I cannot wait months for an outcome, so that in the end they say they cannot do anything, since I will be then delayed with the county court claim.

 

3) If I do land up taking the issue to court, would I be able to claim damages. Currently, I have to lug my work laptop home to replace the use of my failed laptop. I have sufferred this inconvinence quite a bit and wanted to know how I would be able to make any claims of damages.

 

 

Thanks for your help,

WRs,

Koge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You certainly can't do a chargeback for the independent report or you will be attempting to take the money from the independent inspection company and not from the company you are having a dispute with.

 

You will need an independent report that says the motherboard was inherently faulty and you must pay for the report which, if in your favour, you will claim back from the laptop selling company when you put your repair claim into them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You certainly can't do a chargeback for the independent report or you will be attempting to take the money from the independent inspection company and not from the company you are having a dispute with.

 

You will need an independent report that says the motherboard was inherently faulty and you must pay for the report which, if in your favour, you will claim back from the laptop selling company when you put your repair claim into them.

 

Hello,

 

Thanks for the response. I have no plans to do a chargeback on the company inspecting the laptop. My question was: if I do get the independent report which states that the motherboard was of bad quality and did have an inherent fault when purchased - can I send this report to HSBC . Since the independent report would say the laptop had an issue/fault with it from the time of purchase, would HSBC be willing to charge back the money I paid for the laptop on the grounds of the consumer credit act.

 

Thanks,

WRs,

Koge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

nope

chargeback is 120days max.

 

if you do get the ind rpt and its says that

you'll get a new lappy FOC from the manu. via the retailer

 

 

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

Hi ,

 

Thanks for the reply. I am not sure I understand the consumer credit act, because from what I understand , HSBC(The credit arranger) is equally and severely liable for quality of goods as much as the retailer.

 

When I called consumer direct, they said HSBC is equally involved as the retailer, I am unsure what HSBC would do if I did inform them that the laptop I bought with the credit card was faulty from the time of purchase.

 

Thanks for all the replies...

Cheers,

Koge

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ,

 

Thanks for the reply. I am not sure I understand the consumer credit act, because from what I understand , HSBC(The credit arranger) is equally and severely liable for quality of goods as much as the retailer.

 

When I called consumer direct, they said HSBC is equally involved as the retailer, I am unsure what HSBC would do if I did inform them that the laptop I bought with the credit card was faulty from the time of purchase.

 

Thanks for all the replies...

Cheers,

Koge

 

The chargeback needs to be done within 120 day of you becoming aware. In the case of a shop purchase, that is assumed as being the day you made the purchase. Also, you were aware of the problems the first time it went in for repair.

 

Even if you could do a chargeback, you will never get the price you paid, it will be reduce by the time you have had 'enjoyment' of it. After 3 years, that wouldn't leave you enough for a pint of beer.

 

Your best bet is continue down the trail of repair citing continual need of repair.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi,

 

Thanks for the response. I have decided to proceed the county court route. I am yet to go to the independent party for verification - I expect them to write that the motherboard has failed due to a manufacturing defect in the motherboard which causes it to overheat , which finally caused it to fail. I can only explain how the motherboard failed, since both ways they cannot test the motherboard again for what caused it to fail (since it is not working anymore).

 

Also, I would like to know would I be able to claim for damages , due to the inconvience not having the laptop has caused me.

 

Thanks,

Koge

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

hey well done.

 

i'll mark this won....

 

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

it would help if you outlined a bit of how you did this for future members

 

i have also moved it to the COMET forum for a better audience!

 

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

Hello Today,

I successfully sued Comet for £940, £640 for the laptop and missold extended warraty, and interest and court charges.

 

That really is wonderful news. I only wish more would take this route when they are on the end of the continual denial of these companies.

 

It would be nice if you could do as dx has asked and put up some more details.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello All,

 

I will outline in short the exact occurrences and what information helped when.

 

April 2008 - I buy a laptop from Comet for 500£ on Credit Card, and agree to purchase an extended warranty agreement for 2 years for 119.99£. Now at the point of sale, I signed a document for the extended warranty. I was informed by the salesperson that it was an immediate "replacement" warranty - likes of which currys' , tesco et al do actually have. I was told that this warranty would supersede the laptop manufacturers warranty(in the first year) - so that it can be replaced immediately!. The best part is that the terms and conditions of the warranty document say nothing about replacement/repair - just about my right to refund for the warranty itself

 

1st week of May 2008 - The laptop starts overheating and the fan becomes noisy. I inform the storge manager who asks for a 50£ restocking charge - I disagree and he reassures me the replacement warranty will take care of any issues.

 

december 2008 - laptop starts switching off intermittently, when overheated. Comet send the laptop to the manufacturer for repair(against the cotract of replacement by Comet). Again, for 120£ , the laptop should have been repaired by Comet. Got laptop back on January 2009. Never did the switching off issue get resolved fully - But since it was working on minimum use( used for voice chats and not watching movies) I did not give it back

 

April 2009 - Laptop develops problem even worse and is send to comet repair center. Again not much use , but I learnt how to live with the issue.

 

April 2010 - Extended warranty worth 120£ expires!

 

May 2010 - Laptop Dies!

 

June 2010 - I write a letter(email only) to CEO of COmet .Comet after a lot of commotion ask for 127 £ to repair the laptop, not even considering that the extended warranty had just expired , or thinking of the fact that the 2 months the laptop spend with Comet would be good enough to cover me from April 2010 to May 2010. They responded ( by post) stating that they are aware of the SOGA and that since I have had some use of it 127£ was a fair amount. Also they agreed that the laptop was fixed twice - but note this never did they write in that response that the issue was resolved

 

August 2010 - Letter before action send. 127£ reduced to 70£ - I still reject, since warranty is only for 3 months on that work . Anyways it was not about money anymore I guess, more a matter of principle.

 

Today - The judge takes Comet to task asking "what warranty is this?" and "where does it say it is a repair only warranty?" - Comet had no answer. When asked why they did not accept my rejection of the goods as per the EU directive( that the laptop was not fit for use and when I had complained about it in the first week of purchase) - Comet said a lot of customers give back goods and as such they found it right to ask for 50£ for restocking! The judge asked why Comet did not see to my statements of the 1999/EC directive - Comet had no answer.

 

The Judge ruled in my favour.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it has already

 

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

  • 2 months later...

Congrats on the resolution to this

 

I do have one question which I will try and ask without sound like I am hijacking the thread!

 

On what grounds did you sue? Afterall, the warranty had expired...

Was it on the fact that it should not have died in the 2-3 years? Or that it died despite the repair and that the fault was related to the original fault?

 

Only reason I ask is I was in a similar situation with a 50" plasma bought from Comet 3 years ago. In the 3 years of it's life, the power board went and got replaced, main board went and got it replaced and then most recently, it took a tumble in which the screen got replaced. All this was under the 3 year extended warranty (both accidental and mechanical).

 

Soon as the warranty ended, the power board went again. Now the TV despite it's age was hardly used especially since the first power-board replacement.

 

I didn't think anything of it and went ahead and bought a 55" LED 3D TV - and while waiting for it, I got the board fixed for £80 where it was clear the board was previously repaired (and not replaced).

 

My feeling now is after reading this thread, I too could have had grounds to get this done for free or had a resolution like the op?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...