Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Vet put down dog without owners consent, now chasing for money


EOS-5D
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2718 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 All,

 

A friend of ours is in a huge amount of debt from her marriage, where her husband built up this debt, cheated on her and was also very abusive. Our friend had no choice but to go into a refuge with their 2yr old son.

 

Whilst in the refuge, her husband didn't give her dog the medication that it needed and it became ill. the husband took the dog to the vets in the morning, but the vet put the dog to sleep in the afternoon. The dog belonged solely to our friend, not the husband. The vet did not call our friend on her mobile phone to speak with, as the dog's owner), they were happy to speak with her estranged husband. The vets have sent our friend the bill and asked her to solely pay it as the sole vet account holder and dog owner.

 

She wants to know if they can do that? Someone takes the dog in ( who the vet knows) and destroy it without t=contacting the owner and also without checking that the vet account holder is happy to accept the charge for this treatment?

 

many thanks in advance

 

E5D

CAG Toolbar downloaded :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Suggest your friend writes a letter of complaint to the senior Vet at the practice and suggests that this needs to be considered as part of the official complaints process, so it can be escalated to the relevant professional body as necessary.

 

Your friend did not authorise any treatment and therefore cannot be liable for it. Simply being the account holder at the Vets is not enough as no authorisation was provided.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no expert and what I'm about to say doesn't make sense to me, but a friend of mine took his dog (very old dog 18 yo) for a jab and was going to collect late afternoon.

Got a message on answer machine an hour later saying that they had to put the dog down because of complications.

He couldn't answer the phone and only heard the message around 5pm.

By that time they had put his dog to sleep.

He contacted a dog charity and they said that if the dog is suffering it is the vet duty to put it to sleep even without owner consent.

They can also charge a fee for this, however many do not do because they understand the heartbreak.

Again, I don't know how legal it is but the charity was independent and had no contact with the vet, so my friend took it for good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Every separate 'course of treatment' is a separate contract and your friend never contracted for this. She may own the dog, she may be the person who normally takes it to the vet but if the husband took it in without her authorisation then the husband became the client for that visit, not her.

 

http://www.rcvs.org.uk/advice-and-guidance/code-of-professional-conduct-for-veterinary-surgeons/supporting-guidance/communication-and-consent/

 

The first paragraph is pretty clear

Informed consent

 

11.1 Informed consent, which is an essential part of any contract, can only be given by a client who has had the opportunity to consider a range of reasonable treatment options, with associated fee estimates, and had the significance and main risks explained to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...