Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • 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

New Faulty T.V - Very say no!! - **CEO says YES - New t.v +15% off+£45 GOGW**


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2273 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

I have purchased an LG tv from Very and it is faulty.

I ordered the tv on the 29th October and it was delivered from the manufacturer on the 11th November.

 

It started being faulty a week or so later by the sound going off and then a few days later the screen went blue, no picture but had sound.

 

I rang Very on the 5th December who said it was outside the 4 weeks window to send it back because they count the warranty start date as the order date (29th Oct) not the delivery date (7thNov) and I had to ring the manufacture LG to sort it out which I did and they picked it up on the 13th December.

 

Today 19th December LG have phoned me to say thet it is the screen that is faulty and they are waiting for a price of the part.

Then I receiced a phone call from an LG engineer saying that it is the mother board that is faulty and he also is waiting for a price.

 

This T.V is less than 3 weeks old with 2 major faults and I cannot return it or ask for a replacement because Very are saying the order date is the start of the warranty.

 

I am going to email Very tonight to state all these facts and that I am extremely upset and annoyed but I would like to know if there is anything I can add to strenthen my case in insisting on a new TV as I am not happy about keeping the original one as it would be a refurbished tv with a new tv price tag.

 

Regards

Alamand

Edited by Andyorch
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

What a load of gobbledegook.....Read here....

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?440-The-Consumer-Rights-Act-2015

 

Regards

 

Andy

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

Hi Andy

Which section am I needing? Some sections say that if its been returned for repairing, you cannot ask for a replacement. I asked for a replacement but they said no and I had to return it to LG.

Regards

Alamand

Link to post
Share on other sites

you have reported it faulty within 30 days

you are entitled to completely reject the whole deal

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

This is the problem, Very are saying the start day is the order date( 29/10 )and not the delivery date(11/11 ), so when reported it was longer than 30 days from order date even though I was only in the possession of the tv for 3 weeks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

seems they misled there.

sometimes it may seem/be 'easier' to deal direct with a manufacturer, but technically a retailer/distributor etc has a legal responsibilty to deal with such things.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no your claim is against the retailer

 

sadly very [part of the shop direct group]

ALWAYS state goto the manu

which is not correct

and they know it too

 

complain to the CEO via email

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

Thanks Ford

Its dificult with mail order, their Cust Services are abroad and they just follow their sheets, would never buy anything like that normally but the offer was a lot cheaper than Currys etc, turns out not that good a deal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

when items are ordered over the phone or through the post the retailer usually has 28 days to deliver the goods and then you have time to "inspect" them.

this used to be 14 days and you could return them withloout having to say why.

 

Now as the item has been with you longer than that and is faulty

then the next section of the Consumer rghts Act comes into play and that gives you 30 days to retrun for a full cash refund if the goods are unsatisfactory.

 

well, a broken telly certainly is that

so Very are talking bull when they say the warranty starts when you order it,

they know this but dont want the fuss of actually handling the goods themselves becaue they didnt own it in the first place,

just dropshipped it from LG's warehouse.

 

You need to make it clear that you cannot accept the dissembling of their CS arm and expect them to behave in a manner that fulfils the requiremets of consumer law and either refund or replace the telly forthwith (you dont have to accept a repair and certainly not wait any time for one).

 

You might want to tell LG that you arent having it fixed and will be buying a different brand as theirs are clearly problematical and difficult to service

and they should tell Very to decide what they want to do with their item as it isnt your problem!

Link to post
Share on other sites

too right great post!

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

Thanks guys

 

I've emailed Very a couple of times

on each occasion they email back to ring customer services

each time they say they cannot do anything until LG send them an invoice with the cost of repair.

 

I have sent them an email that I will no longer ring cust.serv.

that all correspondence must be by email or letter

that I am not accepting a repaired t.v

that I want a new t.v or refund.

 

I have stated their obligations under the Consumer Rights Act and that they are the retailer and not LG.

 

I received an email saying that it needed to be passed higher for them to investigate,

will let everyone know the outcome when it is sorted.

 

One thing I have learned is, do not buy anything electrical from Very.

Regards Alamand

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shop Direct Group

(Empire Stores, Great Universal, isme, Kays, Littlewoods, Very catalogue, very.co.uk, very.com, Very Network, Marshall Ward, Woolworths, Nationwide Debt Recovery, Shopdirect, KAndCo, K&Co)

 

Mr Matt Dixon

Director

Shop Direct

First Floor

Skyways House

Speke Road

Speke

Liverpool

L70 1AB

 

 

Company Number: 04730752

 

Email: [email protected]

 

 

(ceoemail: https://www.ceoemail.com/)

Edited by stu007

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Guys

I emailed Matt Dixon regarding the t.v explaining I wasn't happy and I would like a new one and not a repaired one.

 

I stated their obligations under Consumer Law and that they were the retailer and so should be dealing with the matter and not put the onus on the customer to sort it out.

 

I received a reply with the usual apologies etc. but they did agree to a replacement t.v plus 15% off the price and a £45 good will gesture.

 

Thank you Stu for the email address,

its just a shame that Very's cust.services are so shocking.

 

I do not think I will be ordering big electrical items from Very again,

I think high st stores are more easier to deal with personally.

 

Thank you guys for your help

Link to post
Share on other sites

hey well done everyone.

 

threat title updated as resolved.

 

 

 

please consider a small donation to keep CAG alive

 

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

You are more than welcome and well done to you and everyone that assisted

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...