Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • My emailed letters to P2G have been received and considered by David Jeremia Schnur who is P2G's 'Escalation and Complaints Adviser'. His response is attached. 19Apr24 David Schnur Linked In page.pdf 19Apr24 P2G email to me confirming my emails received.pdf
    • Not prosecuting in the public interest seems to be bandied about on forums frequented by students. I don't think I've ever seen a prosecution not go ahead because of that. You would have to define why it isn't in the public interest to prosecute someone who isn't paying their way and is costing other travellers more. I can't think of a reason. HB
    • we have known for a very very long time that 9/10 the OC never knows IRRWW are chasing debtors nor  in some cases even taking money from them that the OC never ever see!! IDRWW pockets it -  free money - lets all go on a staff holiday. there was an article some years back whereby that quoted some +£4M debtors had paid to IDRWW on UAE debts that when contacted the originating banks knew nothing about....😎  
    • let the ombudsman do their job. you'll win handsdown you dont obv owe OVO p'haps anything at all.  dont worry about Past Due credit or any other DCA ( THEY ARE NOT BAILIFFS!) as for you being added to the debt, thats quite OK, you were a resident adult and equally liable under law. once you start getting things moving via the  ombudsman dont forget to get your credit files cleansed of any negative data & seek compensation for distress etc, again the  ombudsman should sort both out for you. as you are now NOT a customer of OVO, there is very very little they can do to you now.  
    • A question - did you use the supermarket or the restaurant? I see the restrictions are different. Sign.pdf
  • 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

Government consumer protection agencies to be abolished!!!! What the ,,,,,


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4683 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

Just what is this Country coming to ?

 

The innocent need more help - not less.

 

If people can afford top notch legal representation - then so be it.

 

But the poor among us also deserve representation,,,, be that from Government bodies direct, or the finance to do so. Unfortunately the poorest among us are ripped off more & more because they can't get the help or backing to go up against the big boys.

 

And as for the plan to put everything under the umbrella of Citizen Advice is beyond a joke. It is totally unacceptable.

 

My only run in with them left me more confused than when I walked in. They took on my case against the Council / Housing Benefits etc, then dropped it like a hot potato.

They said that I wasn't helping myself by not supplying documents / evidence etc.

 

This was despite my faxing, emailing, posting and hand delivering reams & reams of papers to their office. They insisted that I hadn't given them anything ! Of course, I have fax and emails logs etc. As it is, I got the problem sorted without them - not a difficult case.

If I had to rely on those people, i'd give up.

 

What can we do to at least keep the agencies that we have ?

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Admin: If this is in the wrong place, please feel free to move it.

 

Small donation sent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This place is fine.

 

Donation received.

Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Yes the experience I had from Citizens Advice was unsatisfactory too! I am sure though that European Union wont allow this situation to exist for long! Perhaps "which" will be able to come up with something and anyway Caggers I'm sure could be empowered somehow!! Exciting times these, its only a matter of time before organisations like the banks are brought to heel!! I personally think there are opportunities here for us all to bring in something much more efficient and effective for the general good of the public.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

I asked the citezens advice for help when I was wrongfully accused of damage to the central reservation on a motorway.

All they sent me was a sheet of A4 paper with a paragraph about slander....

I successfully sorted out the problem out myself anyway, but come on....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked the citezens advice for help when I was wrongfully accused of damage to the central reservation on a motorway.

All they sent me was a sheet of A4 paper with a paragraph about slander....

I successfully sorted out the problem out myself anyway, but come on....

I dont understand this, if you were wrongly acused why wasnt it liable?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...