Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Better version attached with the late appeal explained more clearly for the judge. This will sound silly, but I think it would be a good idea to e-mail it to the court and UKPC on Sunday.  It's probably me being daft, but Sunday is still March, and as it's late, sending it in March rather than April will make it sound like it was less late than it really is.  if you get my drift. You can still pop in a paper version on Tuesday if you want. E-mail address for the court: [email protected] And for UKPC: [email protected]   [email protected] Defendant WS.pdf
    • Update 15th March the eviction notice period expired, and I paid my next month rent along with sending them the message discussed above. After a short while they just emailed me back this dry phrase "Thank you for your email." In two weeks' time I'm gonna need to pay the rent again, and I have such a feeling that shortly after that date the contracts will be exchanged and all the payments will be made.  Now my main concern is, if possible, not to end up paying rent after I move out.  
    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. 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. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
  • 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
      • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Car broke down 4 days after purchase, I want my money back!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4698 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

Hi. Is there anyone out there who can help??

 

I bought a 55 reg Ford Mondeo LX diesel from a second hand dealer. The next day black smoke started coming out when i put my foot on the accelarator. 4 days after purchase we took the car out for a drive on the motorway for the first time and the glow plug warning light came on, we lost power but managed to limp off of the motorway, lots and lots of steam started coming out of the back and we broke down on a busy A-road with my young baby in the back. We had to be towed home by RAC. As it was a sunday afternoon we had to wait until the next morning to contact the dealer, her told us to contact the warrenty co and they told us to take it into a garage for a diagnostic my dad towed me to a local Ford dealership. Ford diagnosed the problem a a worn turbo and possible further engine damage which couldn't be determined until the turbo had been fixed. The warrenty co had rejected the claim because Ford have said it's clearly an existing condition (have this in writing form the warrenty co and Ford will be providing us a diagnostic report stating that it's an existing condition). We've spoken to Consumer Direct for advice and told the dealer we want to reject the car and have a refund (either my old car returned plus the £950 we paid on top, or else the total cost of the Mondeo, £3250). He told us that because he's being, in his words, "helpful" in trying to get the car fixed (which he's not, he's just trying to push the warrenty co to pay so he doesn't have to) that he doesn't have to give us a refund. We've put in in writing to him that we want a refund and are now playing the waiting game.

 

Can anyone give any advice please? As I've said I have a young baby at home and being without a car is very stressfull. I just feel like we've been conned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The warranty is irrelevant here. You claim ia against the seller and as already pointed out, you should reject but you will need to put it in writing and send by recorded delivery. Come back if you need further help.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You must first give him a chance to repair the car for you. You cannot automatically reject the car. You can expect a loan car while yours is being repaired. Most reputable traders will do this for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You must first give him a chance to repair the car for you. You cannot automatically reject the car. You can expect a loan car while yours is being repaired. Most reputable traders will do this for you.

 

Yet again duff advice.

 

The car obviously has a major mechanical problem which, after just 4 days of ownership, is rejectable. However, yes, the OP could demand a repair if he so chooses but from his description, I would advise he rejects.

 

Consult Trading Standards for clarification of the SOGA OP to clarify the advice given in posts 3 & 4.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go again!!!!!!!!!

 

Need the Dragon on this one me thinks!!

 

Warranty will not be valid as there is usually a delay between point of sale and when it comes into affect. And.......the warranty is not a warranty but an insurance policy sold as a warranty. The two are disticntly different.

 

Something again the OFT needs to clamp down on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sam you will find the period of time at which point a person can reject a car has not been dictated in law. For instance the car may of travelled 500 miles in that 4 days. The seller may well agree to refund but could argue that in 500 miles the OP had opportunity to discover any major faults. But it is a grey area as to specifics in law and does need clearer guidance from SOGA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Need the Dragon on this one me thinks!!

 

 

You called? :)

 

Car was faulty at point of sale. Reject the car under the sale of goods act. Car is not fit for purpose bought. Ideally get the car back onto their premises and hand them the keys. Make an exact note of the time and date and ideally take a witness with you.

 

Having done that, give him 14 days to refund your money in full making it clear that are rejecting the car and will not accept a repair. Mark your letter 'Letter before action'.

 

If you don't receive your refund or a promise of such within 14 days, issue a CC summons immediately.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi , thanks for all the responses!

 

I like Dragons suggestion but unfortunatley the car isn't roadworthy and it's a bit of a distance (7 miles)to go on tow, especially as I found it so scary being on tow just the short distance to the Ford garage! In answer to some of the questions and comments, it was the first time I'd driven the car any distance and even then I didn't get all that far, probably got 40 miles before breaking down. Before that I'd only used it to pop to supermarket 2 miles away, that sort of short trip. There is no HP. I have sent him a letter by recorded delivery saying I reject and want a full refund and am waiting for a response.

 

The car broke down on 8th May. I've been on a website called "Sale of Goods Act Hub" and now have a better understanding of consumer law. A lot of people have said that he probably think he can bully me because I'm a woman but I'm going to hold my ground! Just hoping this is all sorted out before out holiday which we need a car for, otherwise will have to hire a car.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the car is un-driveable, did you indicate this in your rejection letter? I would of put something like; 'it is available to collect at your conveinence'. After all, if they had sold it correctly, it wouldn't of been un-driveable now would it?

 

If you do find yourself hiring a car, you may be able to claim the cost back under 'consiquentail losses' should you have to take the matter to court.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...