Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Your page numbers should run through your WX and exhibits so im concerned its page x of 9.
    • The CMA’s latest monitoring report on road fuel shows that prices at the pump have risen since late January, accompanied by above average margins and spreads.View the full article
    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • UK travellers have been turned away at airports because their passports are not valid for EU travel.View the full article
  • 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

Faulty PC bought from Comet SOGA


cervantes01
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3896 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 everyone, I need so help from an expert on the Sale of Goods Act, as I bought a PC from comet in July 2011, it was returned as faulty in October 2011 with a faulty dvd drive, memory and hard drive which they then repaired under warranty it's worked fine ever since and has only had light usage but sadly it wont work at all since July this year.

 

It's a packard bell all in one touch screen pc and the screen fails to work, at barely 2 years old and I think (though cant be sure as I am not an expert) that the graphic card has failed as the screen doesn't come on at all which makes the PC unusable. I didn't purchase an extended guarantee from comet as I've had numerous packard bell pc's over the years and they've all lasted well and have been of general good quality, in other words I've had no complaints about them until now.

 

Comet obviously no longer exist I've emailed packard bell and asked them to undertake a free of charge repair as clearly the device is not fit for purpose as it's reasonable to expect more than two years/(18months approx since last repair) in lifepsan from a computer. Packard bell wont help and have referred me back to the retailer comet who of course no longer exist. I've threatened them with the SOGA in my previous emails and I'm certain though not sure that responsibility for repairs transfers to the manufacturer under the SOGA when a retailer goes out of business or ceases to trade. This is the part I'm not sure about!

 

Does responsibility for the PC transfer to Packard Bell now comet is no longer trading. Also does anyone know what constitutes a fair and reasonable life span for a PC which would satisfy trading standards I've looked on the internet but cant find any consistent (read legally satisfying) references.

 

Many Thanks for any help and advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no sadly soga doesn't fall to the manu.

 

I wonder if the administrators of comet might help?

 

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

have you got another screen just to see if it boots ok

 

are you getting the post beep on power up?

 

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

Yes, it boots up and runs fine except for the built in screen. I tried outputting the video to a second screen using a separate monitor and that too wouldn't work, whilst doing this I noticed a second vga socket which was blocked off with a sticker over it saying 'this port has been blocked' so I plugged it into that and hey presto it outputs to a second monitor so I can see what's going on inside the computer. I did some reading and apparently the 'blocked' port only functions when the graphic card fails and is unusable in normal use. It's powered by the pc's core processor and whilst it's hardly high performance it does allow testing and debugging to go on etc. So in essence I can sort of use the pc but it's performance is far from perfect, i.e no built in screen or touch screen functionality.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no it was a debit card, I understand there's an extra layer of protection that comes from having a credit card, but honestly I probably wouldn't qualify for one given my previous history.

 

Anyway I've become very debt adverse over the years and I take the view that most people wouldn't have a credit card if they were called what they really are and that's a debt card. :wink:

 

Good news though, I've taken the thing apart and luckily the graphics card wasn't integrated into the mother board so I've changed it (£70 for a compatible model) and it now works again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some debit cards do offer protection. Was this a Visa debit card?

If in doubt, contact a qualified insured legal professional (or my wife... she knows EVERYTHING)

 

Or send a cheque or postal order payable to Reclaim the Right Ltd.

to

923 Finchley Road London NW11 7PE

 

 

Click here if you fancy an email address that shows you mean business! (only £6 and that will really help CAG)

 

If you can't donate, please use the Internet Search boxes on the CAG pages - these will generate a small but regular income for the site

 

Please also consider using the

C.A.G. Toolbar

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...