Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello, I will try to outline everything clearly. I am a British citizen and I live in Luxembourg (I think this may be relevant for potential claims). I hired a car from Heathrow in March for a 3-day visit to family in the UK. I was "upgraded" to an EV (Polestar 2). I had a 250-mile journey to my family's address. Upon attempting to charge the vehicle, there was a red error message on the dashboard, saying "Charging error". I attempted to charge at roughly 10 different locations and got the same error message. Sometimes there was also an error message on the charging station screen. The Hertz 0800 assistance/breakdown number provided on the set of keys did not work with non-UK mobiles. I googled and found a bunch of other numbers, none of which were normal geographical ones, and none of which worked from my Luxembourg mobile. It was getting late and I was very short on charge. Also, there was no USB socket in the car, so my phone ran out of battery, so I was unable to look for further help online. It became clear that I would not reach my destination (rural Devon), so I had no choice but to find a roadside hotel in Exeter and then go to the nearest Hertz branch the following day on my remaining 10 miles of charge. Of course, as soon as the Hertz employee in Exeter plugged it into their own charger, the charging worked immediately. I have driven EVs before, I know how to charge them, and it definitely did not work at about 10 different chargers between London and Exeter. I took photos on each occasion. Luckily they had another vehicle available and transferred me onto it. It was an identical Polestar 2 to the original car. 2 minutes down the road, to test it, I went to a charger and it worked immediately. I also charged with zero issues at 2 other chargers before returning the vehicle. I think this shows that it was a charging fault with the first car and not my inability to do it properly. I wrote to Hertz, sending the hotel, dinner, breakfast and hotel parking receipt and asking for a refund of these expenses caused by the charging failure in the original car. They replied saying they "could not issue a refund" and they issued me with a voucher for 50 US dollars to use within the next year. Obviously I have no real proof that the charging didn't work. My guess is they will say that the photos don't prove that I was charging correctly, just that it shows an error message and a picture of a charger plugged into a car, without being able to see the detail. Could you advise whether I have a case to go further? I am not after a refund or compensation, I just want my £200 back that I had to spend on expenses. I think I have two possibilities (or maybe one - see below). It looks like the UK is still part of the European Consumer Centre scheme:  File a complaint with ECC Luxembourg | ECC-Net digital forms ECCWEBFORMS.EU   Would this be a good point to start from? Alternatively, the gov.uk money claims service. But the big caveat is you need a "postal address in the UK". In practice, do I have to have my primary residence in the UK, or can I use e.g. a family member's address, presumably just as an address for service, where they can forward me any relevant mail? Do they check that the claimant genuinely lives in the UK? "Postal address" is not the same as "Residence" - anyone can get a postal address in the UK without living there. But I don't want to cheat the system or have a claim denied because of it. TIA for any help!  
    • Sars request sent on 16th March and also sent a complaint separately to Studio. Have received no response. Both letters were received and signed for.  I was also told by the financial ombudsman that studio were investigating but I've also had no response to that either.  The only thing Studio have sent me is a default notice.  Any ideas of what I can do from here please 
    • Thanks Bank - I shall tweak my draft and repost. And here's today's ridiculous email from the P2G 'Claims Dept' Good Morning,  Thank you for you email. Unfortunately we would be unable to pay the amount advised in your previous email.  When you placed the order, you were asked for the value of your parcel, you stated that the value was £265.00. At this stage the booking advised that you were covered to £20.00 and to enhance this to £260.00 you could pay an extra £13.99 + VAT to fully cover your item for loss or damage during transit, you declined to fully cover your item.  Towards the end of your booking on the confirmation page, you were then offered to take cover again, to which you declined again.  Unfortunately, we would be unable to offer you an enhanced payment on this occasion.  If I can assist further, please do let me know.  Kindest Regards Claims Team and my response Good Afternoon  Do you not understand the court cases of PENCHEV v P2G (225MC852) and SMIRNOVS v P2G (27MC729)? In both cases it was held by the courts that there was no need for additional ‘cover’ or ‘protection’ (or whatever you wish to call it) on top of the standard delivery charge, and P2G were required to pay up in full for both cases, which by then also included court costs and interest. I shall be including copies of both those judgements in the bundle I submit to the court next Wednesday 1 May, unless you settle my claim (£274.10) in full before then. Tick tock…..    
    • IMG_2820-IMG_2820-merged.pdfmerged.pdf Case management was this morning. Here is the Sheriff’s order. Moved case forward to 24/05.   He said there was no signed agreement and after a bit of “erm, erm, yeah but, erm” when he asked them, he allowed time for sol to contact claimant.  what is the next step now? thank you UCM  
    • I've had a quick (well, quick for a thread of this length),  read of this thread and to be honest I'm struggling to make heads nor tails of the actual crux of the issue here. You seem awfully convinced that whatever is going on is worth the fight and the odds are in your favour but with how the thread has gone it seems that one trail goes cold so you simply move on to another in an attempt to delay the inevitable. All it does is end up digging holes and confusing others and yourself which means any advice given to you is completely pointless. I note that for the life of this thread there has not been any documentation or correspondence uploaded for people to have a look. Have you got any that you'd be willing to redact and upload for members to assist you? Right now, it seems people are shooting out advice while being in the dark because it's starting to become very difficult for people who weren't here at the start of this (including myself) to follow along. Right now, this whole thread is just hypothetical "He said, she said" and is going nowhere fast. Nothing more than basic advice can be given which, as you've sought out some legal advice, is likely not sufficient to actually come to any sort of conclusion. I, personally, am starting to agree with others that it may be best to consider bankruptcy and put the matter behind you.  
  • 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 
        • 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
  • Recommended Topics

ATL Training - useless! FOS rule in my Favour, now thinking of court to reclaim money - help


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2355 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 everybody!

 

I am having ongoing problems with ATL.

 

I signed up for my electrical training course on the 25/10/2013.

i have had numerous problems such as website, logging in, software and minimal support

i passed all 11 modules but could not get passed the pre attendance exam. (the exam you need to pass before you can start practical training)

 

after failing the first time i thought maybe its me being stupid

i sat the test again only to fail once more!

 

i spoke to my uncle and cousin who are qualified electricians they could not understand how i had failed with the answers i had selected.

 

i sent ATL a letter stating i wanted to cancel the course and a full refund as i had been mis-sold and the course was not fit for purpose.

the training section phoned me back with troubleshooting methods for the software (which did NOT work)

 

i was told that the pre attendance exam was NOT compulsory. so why have to do it in the first place? i told them i still wanted to cancel course etc. as i saw the company on don't get done get dom. Also when i decided to do the course they have falsely advertised governing bodies etc

 

i went to citizens advice and sent various letters to ATL practical training LTD and Career Development Finance LTD (who are jointly liable)

 

I then contacted the financial ombudsman who did an investigation and the companies offered to cancel the course

and finance agreement and keeps all monies i have paid.

ATL also asked for all books back which i found amusing!

 

i am now thinking of taking them to court.

The price of the course was £5770 i have so far paid £3000. (£135 a month)

 

Has anyone else got this far or had any results?

 

HAS ANYBODY ACTUALLY BEEN ON THE PRACTICAL SIDE OF THE COURSE

AND HAS ANYONE ACTUALLY COMPLETED ANY COURSES???

 

Thanks in advance

 

 

Danny.

Link to post
Share on other sites

own thread created.

 

 

dx

  • Confused 1

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

so what was the actual recommendations of the FOS?

 

 

and why did they not rule you money be returned if the loan agreement was cancelled?

is that what the FOS ruled?

 

 

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 dx100uk,

 

Did FOS rule in your favour?

was your case the same as mine?

 

the FOS haven't come back with their verdict yet.

 

but that's what ATL and CDF came up with as i started a part 75 claim.

 

however if FOS don't rule in my favour i will be taking court action!

 

I contacted dom.

But unfortunately new series has started so they are not taking on cases due to the high volume of people having consumer problems.

I am also in the process of contacting watchdog.

 

Danny.

Link to post
Share on other sites

didn't say I had an issue with them...

 

what do you mean by a part 75 claim?

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

  • 4 months later...

i passed the pre attendance test in one seating....and guess what?

more books I am on the 35th assignment now...5 more to go...will see if they are a [problem] planning to finish it ASAP...

 

I am having problems with their scenario CD... installed all required software, bought an i7 with a massive RAM and graphics than can be used for video editing still it does not run...

 

they told a friend of mine who is also with atl that they wont require the scenario test....

 

the scenario is freaking crap....low graphics and low quality...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

I am in the same boat

 

what is needed is evidence that they are connected to the Skilltrain [problem] and part of Metropolitan International schools.

 

Consumer protection from unfair trading 2008 section 5 and 7 are the laws they have broken.

 

I am going to claim through County Court like the skill train guy Rob Auger did.

 

I am sure they are connected.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

ATL practical Training have ripped me off too.

 

I was signed on to the Renewable Energy Course and have been paying £135 a month.

I paid £5770 in total

 

after i paid my final monthly payment (and 90% of the way through the course) they tell me the course has expired!

 

I really dont know what to do now.

The 'salesman' who signed me on to the course told me I would have to complete Level 2 Plumbing and some Level 3 plumbing units before I could do the renewable energy side of things.

He told me most students finish the course in 4 years.

 

I signed up.

I was 3 years and 2 months into the course,

had just made my final payment,

and had just finished the level 2 and level 3 plumbing units

(i was literally about to start the the renewable side of things)

 

when i called to book the practical training I was told that the course had expired and it was up to ATL's discretion whether to allow me to finish.

Which they wouldn't.

I told them that to my understanding I was on track to completing.

 

they said in the small print it says the course is 36 months.

They didnt even send me a letter to let me know.

 

I am devastated that I've been stitched up by these crooks.

 

After reading some of these threads it seems that ATL might be struggling to facilitate the Renewable Energy part of the course.

Which would explain why they suddenly told me I was out of time.

It would also explain why there were so many delay tactics when trying to progress through the modules.

 

Does anyone have any advice?

I have contacted the FOS but they said if it is in the small print I probably cant do anything.

 

surely as they have been so misleading and fraudulently selling a course that they cant deliver accounts for something?

Has anyone successfully got their money back off of these ATL crooks??

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...