Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice is change. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been reading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. On mediation form you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee that you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.  
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
    • too true HB, but those two I referred for starters - appear to be self admitted - One to excuse other lockdown law breaking, by claiming his estate away from his consistency and London abode was his main home the other if he claims to have 'not told the truth' in his own words via that quote - to have mislead his investors rather than broken lobbying rules   - seem to be slam dunks - pick which was your law breaking - it seems to be both and much more besides in Jenricks case Starmer was director of public prosecutions yet the tories are using seemingly baseless allegations for propaganda and starmer is missing pressing apparent blatant criminality in politics
    • I am sure the resident experts will give you a comprehensive guide to your rights.  The responsibility lies with the retailer. I have dealt with Cotswold before for similar. And found them refreshingly helpful.   Even when I lost the receipt for one item I had bought in Inverness. The manager in Newcastle called the store. Found the transaction and gave me a full refund. 
  • 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

v5 and engine number from dealer


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2388 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 bought a new bike a few weeks ago for 10k from BMW , The dealer was great all the way through the sale and i rode away a happy man

 

The dealer went through all the paperwork with me and sent the V5 off to be put in my name , I was then going through the service books and right at the back it says engine replacement 2k ago

 

Now although some people might feel this is great as its a new engine they also updated the engine a year after mine was made

i have a different engine with the newer clutch and gearbox ,

Also they did not update the V5 as i had that back the other day and now they don't match

 

I called my insurance company this morning and asked if the v5 not matching was an issue ,

The lady i spoke to and the manager both said yes this could be an issue as if the bike was stolen and recovered then the engine would not match and with so many bikes being stolen and stripped for parts it could affect a claim ,

 

I then called DVLA and told the same story and asked how i go about getting this changed and was told that i need the paperwork for the engine swap and and to send to all off to DVAL ,

I had no paperwork ,

I have to add that its the same dealer that swapped the engine is the same one i bought it from so they obviously knew all about it

 

I emailed the dealer this afternoon and told him of my grievance and the salesman reply was i have spoken to the manager and that i can just send the v5 off , WHY SHOULD I "

 

To be honest i have lost complete looks on the bike and trust from the dealer and feel they have been dishonest about the whole thing ,

I know a lot of people would be happy with a new engine with less miles but i wanted the bike i paid for with the original engine and i feel i should of been told that the bike had a replacement engine and then i could of made my own mind up to proceed with the purchase ,

The bike only had 13k on it anyway so its not as if the bike had high milage

 

Do i have any rights to return and get my money back or another bike with all the correct engine and V5 ,

Its a lot of money and I'm absolutely fuming

Link to post
Share on other sites

Every time I have bought a vehicle, and that's quite a few, before parting with my money I have taken the V5C and checked the chassis number and engine numbers.

I dont trust anyone's "word".

But hindsight is a wonderful thing.

 

Reject the vehicle on misrepresentation.

Easy as.

 

The vehicle they have sold you has got false documents

Link to post
Share on other sites

i int really get a chance to go through the V5 , yes i can see its not my fault for not taking it off him and going through it myself but he went through it and then took it away to send off so i never really got a look at it until i had it delivered back in my name

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone

 

i bought a new bike a few weeks ago for 10k from BMW , The dealer was great all the way through the sale and i rode away a happy man

 

The dealer went through all the paperwork with me and sent the V5 off to be put in my name , I was then going through the service books and right at the back it says engine replacement 2k ago

 

Now although some people might feel this is great as its a new engine they also updated the engine a year after mine was made

i have a different engine with the newer clutch and gearbox ,

Also they did not update the V5 as i had that back the other day and now they don't match

 

I called my insurance company this morning and asked if the v5 not matching was an issue ,

The lady i spoke to and the manager both said yes this could be an issue as if the bike was stolen and recovered then the engine would not match and with so many bikes being stolen and stripped for parts it could affect a claim ,

 

I then called DVLA and told the same story and asked how i go about getting this changed and was told that i need the paperwork for the engine swap and and to send to all off to DVAL ,

I had no paperwork ,

I have to add that its the same dealer that swapped the engine is the same one i bought it from so they obviously knew all about it

 

I emailed the dealer this afternoon and told him of my grievanceicon and the salesman reply was i have spoken to the manager and that i can just send the v5 off , WHY SHOULD I "

 

To be honest i have lost complete looks on the bike and trust from the dealer and feel they have been dishonest about the whole thing ,

I know a lot of people would be happy with a new engine with less miles but i wanted the bike i paid for with the original engine and i feel i should of been told that the bike had a replacement engine and then i could of made my own mind up to proceed with the purchase ,

The bike only had 13k on it anyway so its not as if the bike had high milage

 

Do i have any rights to return and get my money back or another bike with all the correct engine and V5 ,

Its a lot of money and I'm absolutely fuming

Link to post
Share on other sites

new and old threads merged

please keep to one thread

read from post 1

you already have answers

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

they have offered me my money back £10k

I'm still not happy as i can't buy the same bike for 10k  

 

 

they have also offered me a replacement bike at an extra cost of £750

either way I feel let down and stuck as i can't afford to pay more for a bike which aint the colour i wanted

Link to post
Share on other sites

you paid £10k and they are offering you £10k.

 

What more do you really expect?

 

Go elsewhere with your money,

you are not entitled to be in a position where you are better off and nor are they so you have nothing to complain about

 

it is clear that both parties no longer want to really do business with each other.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...