Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The incident was 03rd March 2024 - and that was the only letter that I have received from MET 15th April 2024 The charge I paid was at the Stansted Airport exit gate (No real relevance now - I thought this charge was for that!!).   Here is the content of email to them (Yes I know I said I was the driver !!!!) as said above -  I thought this charge was for that!! "Stansted Airport" Dear “To whom it may concern” My name is ??  PCN:  ?? Veh Reg: Date of Incident: 03rd March 2024 I have just received a parking charge final reminder letter, dated 10th April 2024 - for an overstay.  This is the first to my knowledge of any overstay. I am aware that I am out of the 28 days, I don’t mean to be rude, this feels like it is a scam My movements on this day in question are, I pulled into what looked like a service station on my way to pick my daughter and family up from Stansted airport. The reason for me pulling into this area was to use a toilet, so I found Starbucks, and when into there, after the above, I then purchased a coffee. After which I then continued with my journey to pick my daughter up. (however after I sent this email I remember that Starbucks was closed so I then I walked over to Macdonalds) There was no signs about parking or any tickets machines to explains about the parking rules. Once at Stansted, I entered and then paid on exit.  So Im not show where I overstayed my welcome.. With gratitude    
    • Just to enlarge on Dave's great rundown of your case under Penalty. In the oft quoted case often seen on PCNs,  viz PE v Beavis while to Judges said there was a case for claiming that £100 was a penalty, this was overruled in this case because PE had a legitimate interest in keeping the car park free for other motorists which outweighed the penalty. Here there is no legitimate interest since the premises were closed. Therefore the charge is a penalty and the case should be thrown out for that reason alone.   The Appeals dept need informing about what and what isn't a valid PCN. Dummies. You should also mention that you were unable to pay by Iphone as there was no internet connection and there was a long  queue to pay on a very busy day . There was no facility for us to pay from the time of our arrival only the time from when we paid at the machine so we felt that was a bit of a scam since we were not parked until we paid. On top of that we had two children to load and unload in the car which should be taken into account since Consideration periods and Grace periods are minimum time. If you weren't the driver and PoFA isn't compliant you are off scot free since only the driver is liable and they are saying it was you. 
    • Thank you dx. I consider myself well and truly told :) x Thank you dx. I consider myself well and truly told :) x
    • Doubt the uneconomic write off would be registered, unless you agreed to accept write off settlement of the claim. It is just cosmetic damage. All that has happened, is that the car has been looked at and they realised the repair costs are going to exceed the value of the car. If the car is perfectly driveable with no upcoming normal work required to pass next MOT, your current Insurers will continue Insurance and you can accept an amount from third party Insurers to go towards you repairing the scratched bodywork.    
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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 2308 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...