Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Firstly, and sorry for not asking earlier but have you submitted your DQ yet?
    • As suggested by JK2054 I'll email Evri to their small claims email address, attaching the label and collection receipt and quoting the Money Claims ref number. Is there anything else in addition to sending the email I should do at this stage? Rgds, J
    • Hi, I'd change justice centre to county court. I also wouldn't be including a telegraph article in the bundle. It doens't prove anything law and you don't have distribution rights on it. I also wouldn't personally break down the exhibits on the index page, normally people have a seperate page for this right before the exhibits. The main index page normally just says Exhibits to WX of [Your Name] or at least that's the format I use/see people here use, although really it makes minimal difference.   I also see that despite referencing several judgements you haven't included the EVRi one   paragraph 46 really needs to go imo it has nothing to do with anything. Your in court to apply the law to your case, not to tell the judge about a newspaper that means nothing to your claim.   I also see you've adopted the issues in dispute/not in dispute, which is also known as a scott schedule. if you are taking this approach, for things not in dispute I would say this needs to be things that are agreed between parties, not things like "There is no dispute that I am happy to supply all this evidence which is included in the court bundle." I would say that issues in dispute is to focus on the aspects of the claim that are in dispute, such as whether liability is limited by insurance or not, so I'd be changing that accordingly.   BF should be along shortly to advise on things.
    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • J, I just numbered them like that; once the witness statement is made, I'll add it to the pages.   The court date has been set as 02 July 2024. Please find attached V6. I will send an unredacted to the email.  claim budle_V6.pdf
  • 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

RBS Visa Charge back time limit for faulty car


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2596 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

My son is having a problem with a Visa charge back through RBS.

 

He bought a car 3 September 2016

the rear brake lines ruptured suddenly due to corrosion on 15 December 2016.

 

The dealer agreed to fix it.

 

Then 13 January 2017 it failed it's MOT because the front brake lines were corroded.

 

At the same time various advisories for corrosion on most of the underside

suspension,

chassis would have cost more than the car was worth.

 

My son rejected the car under Consumer rights act 2015 (note that this requires the dealer to collect the car).

He refused the rejection.

 

My son paid by debit card.

he initiated a charge back based on the fault.

 

RBS have turned it down as it was more 120 days from the point of sale.

 

However we understood that it was different for a fault and 120 days from becoming aware of the problem.

This is stated on lots of consumer websites including Which.

 

be96erj how did it work out for you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My son bought a car using his RBS Visa debit card in September.

 

In December the rear brake lines ruptured due to severe corrosion.

The repair was negotiated by our local garage via the dealer.

 

Car then had an MOT in early January with very little use fortunately because it failed the MOT due to severe corrosion of Front brake lines.

 

My son rejected the car under the consumer rights act 2015 but the dealer refused to accept the rejection.

 

As he paid by RBS Visa Direct Debit

he contacted RBS to initiate a chargeback.

 

After a few days they replied saying that it was more than 120 days since the purchase date.

 

However everything we read tells us that if there is a fault/problem it is this date where the count down starts. Does anyone know which is correct?

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately that's exactly the information I have found everywhere and it doesn't really answer my question.

It mentions charge back because of a fault but doesn't give a time frame.

The first fault was 3 months after purchase but the bank says that it is too late.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately that's exactly the information I have found everywhere and it doesn't really answer my question.

It mentions charge back because of a fault but doesn't give a time frame.

The first fault was 3 months after purchase but the bank says that it is too late.

 

It does its in the link I provided.....

 

Are there any Time Limits on making a Chargeback Claim? YES

 

To make a Chargeback claim you will need to contact your Card Provider/Bank within their time limit.

 

Generally it is 120 days, which starts from the day that you become aware of an issue with the Goods or Services purchased.

 

There is also an overall cut off point of 540 days for Visa Chargeback. Therefore, your deadline for requesting a Chargeback is 120 days from discovering you have an issue, or 540 days from the transaction date, whichever comes first.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...