Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
  • 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
      • 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

Faulty goods robot from france thru UK reseller


Jade-Simone
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2317 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

 

I am not sure I am posting in the right section so apologies in advance.

 

I bought a humanoid robot, ordered in May (2017), received June.

It developed a fault in July after general setup.

Contacted the reseller I bought it from and he advised me to send the robot back to the manufacturer in Paris.

 

I logged a support call with the manufacturer

they went through the process of checking,

asking me to do various things including sending them videos of the fault which they eventually confirmed that it needed to be returned for repair.

 

I thought nothing of it

(I now realise, I should have requested a refund or replacement -as it was within 30 days).

 

I paid the courier service to return the robot to Paris

after nearly a month the robot was returned,

with nothing to indicate what had been done to it

or what the problem was with it.

 

I sent an email asking this question

had no response from the support department.

 

Please note that the robot is an essential part of my work as I teach robotics and run workshops

during that time I had to cancel my bookings and shift things around a bit until I got it back.

 

Since the robot's return in September,

I have had a number of deaths in my family so had not spent much time using the robot.

 

I used it to create a programme which I could not finish because of the family issues.

Everything seemed ok when I did use it although a couple of occasions displayed the same issue it had gone for repair for.

As it wasn't significant I had ignored it.

 

A couple of weeks ago I was at a meeting with a large company who offered me some consultancy work where they were interested in running a project with my robot, I decided to create a programme to use as a demonstration for them.

 

In doing so the robot started demonstrating the original fault

this time worse than before

(problem with the motors which caused it to constantly crash).

 

I videoed this as best as I could whilst holding it so as not to damage it.

 

I contacted the reseller and demanded from him to sort out the issue between him and the manufacturer as my contract was with him and not the manufacturer.

 

He agreed to sort things out on my behalf.

He did this ensuring that I was copied into all emails.

I had explained the problem and requested a replacement,

sent the videos I had recorded.

 

The manufacturer wanted details of the previous return,

which I supplied,

only for them to respond saying that when the robot went for repair,

I had not supplied them with detailed information of the problem (which I had)

they had only checked the robot and it was fine so sent it back.

 

They also refused my request of a replacement robot however, offered to collect and repair at their expense.

 

I responded to their email explaining as above and the fact that I was not happy about not being offered a replacement and gave them details as to when they can collect the robot for repair.

 

my anger, I decided to search online for my legal position and realised that the reseller is the one who should be offering me a replacement or full or partial refund.

 

The reseller has simply said to me in an email that I should deal with the manufacturer direct and he will help me where he can.

I realise that I should have had this info when the first fault occurred,

then I would have been able to demand the refund or replacement.

 

We are now approaching 6 months since I received the goods following my order.

 

Please can someone help me deal with the reseller as I believe that he is responsible as he was paid for the robot and not the manufacturer.

I stated in my last email both of them that I was not happy with them refusing to replace the robot and that I did not feel confident that the matter would be properly resolved since they didn't repair it despite me clearly indicating what the fault was.

 

Are there any strongly worded letter templates I could use,

or is this a matter for the small claims court against the reseller?

 

I have also asked who is going to pay for my loss of earnings since the robot has not been fit for me to use as I should?

 

Any help would be greatly received!

 

Thanks

JS

 

 

Sorry for such a long post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

onus is on teh retailer to replace and refund. Not you to go to the manufacturer. Who is the retailer.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would accept the manu offer of a repair

but this time ensure they are aware of the issue.

 

poss tape a penstick to the things with Videos of what is does [not] do

and your programming routines so they can test themselves.

 

THEN if that fails go after the reseller,

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

Thank you for your speedy reply.

 

A tech company called NCI Technologies.

They have been supportive but I feel not enough.

They have acknowledged to the manufacturer that the fault was there from point of purchase.

 

I have a log of all communications including the exchange before the robot was sent back the first time.

 

I almost feel powerless but to send it back

also feel I should at least write a strongly worded letter to the reseller reminding them of their responsibility in all of this.

 

The robot was not cheap but worth the investment due to the fact that it would enhance my teaching work.

since purchase I have not been able to use it in any of the teaching activities I purchased it for.

 

I have a potential of work with a major Cloud Tech company

now I can't do the demos I said I would do before our project starts as soon as schools open in the New Year.

 

I am afraid that it goes back for repair and I end up in the same situation again with a robot that does not work properly.

I feel I have been too trusting!

 

I am still trying to get my head around the Consumer laws of 2015 but need help with writing a letter to the reseller so that he cannot say later that he is not responsible.

 

Thanks again!

JS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm sorry to say that very unusually I'm going to disagree with the advice offered by site team member DX100UK

 

This matter is absolutely the responsibility of the reseller and they should not be allowed to try and pass the buck. Furthermore, you are being urged to deal with it outside the UK so that if you eventually have any problems or disputes about it then you will have to do address it under French law with a French manufacturer. You can take it from me (and believe me I know about these things) that the French reputation for reluctance and poor customer service and denying liability is well deserved.

 

I would write to the reseller and demand an immediate refund. Tell them that you have already drawn the fault to their attention within the first six months and they have opted to refer you to the manufacturer for a repair. You have done this and the repair has failed and so now under the Consumer Rights Act you are invoking your right to a refund and that's what you want. If you want replacement than tell them that you would be prepared to accept a suitable replacement but this has to be without any delay.

 

I understand also that you have incurred various losses. I don't think any loss of earnings will be recoverable – unfair as that might seem – but I do think that the expenses of having sent the item to Paris are completely recoverable from the reseller.

 

Do not be fobbed off. Keep your dispute with the reseller. It is up to them to take it up with the manufacturers in Paris – if they want.

 

You haven't told us about the value of this item or the value of your losses.

 

Also, I understand that you may have bought this as a business rather than as a consumer. Is that correct? If this is the case then if you have to bring a legal action then it will have to be in the defendants local court – not yours. I would suggest that you start reading up about how to bring a small claim in the County Court. It is extremely easy and on the basis of what you have told us here, your chances of winning are much better than 95%. You will also be able to sue for your losses – but probably not loss of earnings although you could include that in the claim if you wanted – why not?

 

Apart from the practical reasons and the legal reasons for advising you to keep this strictly with the reseller, there is an ethical reason also. Where resellers are able successfully to fob their customers off onto manufacturers, it acts as a disincentive to resellers to put pressure directly on the manufacturers themselves to make sure that the items they are manufacturing and supplying are of good quality. If the reseller is held to his responsibilities here then he will be more careful about buying from that supplier in the future or if he does, he will put more pressure on the manufacturer to get it right the first time – and also to be more responsive and more customer facing. Believe me, French manufacturers and suppliers need this lesson more than many others in Europe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add, I see that you have been with us since 2006. I'm sorry that you have been here so long but haven't thought to come to us much earlier. I expect that you will do the next time.

 

Also, what is the name of the reseller? They're trying hard to keep themselves out of the frame – but you may as well name them here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A tech company called NCI Technologies

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

  • 3 weeks later...

So sorry I have not responded earlier. I had two family funerals so have been consumed.

 

I must admit, I did forget about the forum and was reminded by a popup during my search for advice hence my initial post.

I will remember in future!

 

Before the last funeral last week,

I rang CAB Consumer rights,

who helped me draft a letter stating that I would reject the offer of a second repair since the 2015 Act meant that I didn't have to accept the 2nd repair.

I am usually good at having all my rights at my finger tips but hadn't on this occasion (consumed by family events).

 

The letter I sent via email seems to have done the trick.

The seller was not from Ebay but a tech company and he has accepted all responsibility and has offered me a new robot despite initially sending me back to the manufacturer.

 

At my previous work,

I purchased 3 of these robots

(from another tech company- both I deal with all the time),

so know extensively how they work and have been using and teaching with them since 2013,

this was the first time one had gone wrong within the first month of purchase.

 

they sent a courier to collect the faulty robot on Friday to return to Paris and received notification yesterday of the replacement robot on its way to me.

I had demanded a new replacement robot as I have a project booked for early in the new year.

Sadly there is only one manufacturer of this particular robot although different resellers so didn't want to get a refund.

 

I will read the info on making a small claim in the county court as it will be useful as I may need to claim for the cost for the first postage return back to Paris and other losses etc.

 

Thank you all for your advice and support.

I will definitely come back here first if I have any such issues again (hopefully it won't happen again!)

 

Wishing you all a very merry Christmas and a very productive New Year!

-JS-

Link to post
Share on other sites

hey its nice you got a result.

 

have you approached directly either 'party' about your expenses to date and being out of pocket?

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...