Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Update 15th March the eviction notice period expired, and I paid my next month rent along with sending them the message discussed above. After a short while they just emailed me back this dry phrase "Thank you for your email." In two weeks' time I'm gonna need to pay the rent again, and I have such a feeling that shortly after that date the contracts will be exchanged and all the payments will be made.  Now my main concern is, if possible, not to end up paying rent after I move out.  
    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. 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. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
    • Welcome to the Forum I have moved your topic to the appropriate forum  Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Please continue to post here.   Andy
  • 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
      • 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

My rights to hand car back to dealership


Lauren1302
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2013 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 guys,

 

Not sure if am on the correct part to post this so apologize if i am just looking for some advice this is my first post.

 

We bought a van 3 months ago on HP and every month the van has broken down on us we have been told by the garage that it has been injector problems each time so this time we decided we didn't want the van anymore couldn't trust it at all the garage tried to hit us 1300 quid usage fees it's done below average miles and nothing wrong with the van what do ever.

 

We have contacted the finance each time it's broken down they then told us the price of usage fees they are asking for was ridiculous and would put a complaint in. So this morning we had a phone call from the finance telling us they have spoken to the garage but they have told then it hasn't been the same problem 3 times it's been different problems so basically lying to them to cover themselves.

 

Every phone call with the garage is recorded and every phone call they have told us it's been Injectors again.

The finance company have basically said that the garage have covered themselves well knowing that they have lied yet we have to take the van back and be shafted again surely we have a good to stand on somewhere here?

 

Hopefully this makes sense

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be helpful if you can space and punctuate your posts so that it makes it easier to read for people who would like to help you.

 

Please look at the Consumer Rights Act and you will see that if a defect occurs within the first six months of the contract, you have a right to insist on a repair and if the repair fails then you are entitled to insist on a refund or a replacement at your option.

 

If you had reacted in the first 30 days then you would have had an automatic right to a refund or a replacement.

 

Write to the garage – email and also recorded delivery – and tell them that you are asserting your rights under the consumer rights act and that you are giving them a single opportunity to repair the van and if they fail to do so then you will be insisting on a refund.

 

Is the van working? Can it be taken to the garage? You will be able to claim the costs of delivering the vehicle to the garage and also any other losses that you have sustained during your period of ownership.

 

What is the name of the garage and also which is a finance company that you are using? They are all leading you around by the nose

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have suddenly realised that there is an important question to ask you – did you buy this van as part of a business or as an individual consumer?

 

If you bought the van as a business then you will not have the benefit of the consumer rights act, but you will still be able to complain and to make a claim – although it might be slightly less straightforward.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The first problem was in the first month of having the van. The problems have been reported from the beginning to the finance company.

 

The van is in an individual customers name. They have never compensated the money we have paid for the van to be towed to them neither have they gave us a courtesy van.

 

The finance company have basically said we need to take the van back surely this can't be right?

 

Specially when there words were they've covered it well knowing that they have lied

 

The garage was bridgend group and finance company is close brothers

Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to be suggesting that this van was sold to an individual consumer and not business. That's fine but you need to be sure of this because it could come back to bite you if it turns out that you are representing a trade purchaser as a private buyer.

 

It's actually not correct that you are responsible for getting the van back to the garage – but frankly to save a lot of hassle this might be the best thing to do and make sure that you keep all the bills relating to this and then claim afterwards.

 

If this van was sold to a private consumer then you should send the letter which I suggested above.

 

Is this the company? https://www.bridgendgroup.co.uk/

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I'd hedge a bet and say this a Renault/Vauxhall Traffic or Movano shared chassis and engine type of Vehicle?

 

I would tell your finance company that

A: your intention is to reject it under the consumer rights act,

and that you're taking it back to the dealership on XYZ date,

where you will be leaving it at their premises,

and getting a refund at best

or a replacement vehicle at a compromise,

 

or

going down the small claims track at worse.

 

Either way THEIR asset will be at the dealership where you purchased it and that after rejection be expecting them to either take on new vehicle details or cancelling the agreement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

don't forget to fill out the V5c if you do too.

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...