Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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
    • Please provide advice on the following situation: I rented out my property to four students for 16 months until March 2024. Initially, the property was in very good condition, but now it needs extensive renovation. This includes redoing the bathroom, replacing the kitchen, removing wallpaper, and redecorating due to significant mould growth. The tenants also left their furniture on the grass, which is owned by the local authority. As a landlord, I've met all legal requirements. It seems the damage was caused by poor ventilation—windows were always closed, and heating wasn't used. There was also a bathroom leak fixed by reapplying silicone. I tried to claim insurance, but it was denied, citing tenant behaviour as the cause by looking at the photos, which isn't covered. The deposit barely covers the repair costs, or else I'll have to pursue money claims, which I've never done before and am unsure about its legal complications or costs. Any thoughts on this?
  • 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

Warranty


shaz1000
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1958 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 had a washing machine replaced under a warranty in 2015 because it could not be repaired.

The replacement washing machine had its motor replaced at my expense 4 weeks ago and now it has stopped working altogether.

 

If purchased directly from the retailer the machine would have cost £900, so it is not a cheap washing machine.

I would expect it to last longer than 3 years.

I have any rights to a repair or replacement machine?

 

If so do I contact the retailer or warranty provider?

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

sadly I don't think there is a lot you can do now

you shouldn't of had the motor replaced IMHO

makes it a TINY case now as you've broken any warranty you might have had with the replacement machine.

 

your original cover under CRA ran from 6yrs from the original purchase

which might have covered you when the motor failed too.

but someones stuck its fingers in it now

 

TINY = Tough Its Now Yours

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

sadly I don't think there is a lot you can do now

you shouldn't of had the motor replaced IMHO

makes it a TINY case now as you've broken any warranty you might have had with the replacement machine.

 

your original cover under CRA ran from 6yrs from the original purchase

which might have covered you when the motor failed too.

but someones stuck its fingers in it now

 

TINY = Tough Its Now Yours

 

What about repair by retailer?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Bosch replaced the motor you should not have paid for it, because the New Machine was covered by the Sale of Goods Act and in this case, as it was prior to Oct 1 2015.

 

So as Bosch replaced the original machine under Warranty, you need to remind Bosch that the machine/Motor was not fit for purpose and you require a new machine, a refund for the previous charge or another motor fitted Free of charge + refund.

 

You have to remind Bosch that the machine was covered under the Sale of Goods act quoting the date oct1 2015.

 

FS

Edited by dx100uk
space
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bosch said if the machine is not fit for purpose then it is between the retailer and customer because it comes under the sale of goods act and has nothing to do with them.

 

The warranty was domestic and general

Edited by dx100uk
quote
Link to post
Share on other sites

urm get complicated

so you've never made a claim to D&G

so you paid for a warranty you didn't use and was worthless in the first place

go reclaim in back?

 

if bosch replaced the machine in 2015, it's motor then failed, you paid for it, its still failed, the issue is with bosch under soga as FS says.

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

My current machine was replaced under a warranty in 2015.

The warranty was domestic and general (probably underwriters) but it would have been via Bosch.

 

Once I received the current machine there was no point in renewing the warranty because the machine came with a 2 year manufacturers guarantee.

 

Current machine's motor failed after 3 years when it was no longer under guarantee and I did not have an extended warranty.

The motor was recently replaced by Bosch.

 

The machine has developed another fault - maybe the pump and currently does work.

I hope this is clearer?

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

unusual for bosh to be in bed with D&G,

did you or have you to date informed the retailer... who was? of the original fault that caused the machine to be replace or the failed motor since? were they involved in anyway or are they totally unaware of all issues since the day you went to buy with them.

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

OK think I have got this now,

you had a D&G service/warranty plan,

they no longer were able to repair the machine so replaced it,

with a machine direct from Bosch and this all happened in 2015 prior to Oct 1st,

 

you decided as there was a 2yr Warranty in place,

you did not carry on with the D&G warranty/service plan.

 

So in fact the retailer who supplied the Bosch Washing Machine was D&G,

even though it came direct from Bosch.

Complicated!!!!

 

As I see it D&G are responsible as the retailer and the Sale of Goods act applies,

however I would approach Bosch as the goods came direct from them and more importantly you employed them to replace the motor,

and back in 2015 the 2 year Warranty they offered was separate from the Sale of Goods Act which covered up to 6 years,

 

so first port of call Bosch,

confirm the date of replacement and SOGA see how you get on

Not going to be easy but worth a try

 

FS

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

urm..im still not convinced of the link between bosch and D&G...

 

can you tell us who the original retailer was please...

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

dx I think you will find that D&G will insure most machines,instead of getting their own engineer calling,they give you a work repair number and you phone the maker in this case Bosch,and the makers engineer calls.I felt as this was the case with shaz1000 which would make D&G as the retailer who arranged the supply of the replacement machine.Think thats right????

FS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes as you had the Motor replaced by Bosch 4 weeks ago surely they will replace this free of charge,the motor is covered by ~CRA~and you can play the "wonderful German Engineering Card" as well.

 

My reply 6 more concerned that the machine was replaced prior to Oct1 2015 so is covered by the Sale of Goods Act and your consumer rights are much better than the current CRA,its up to you Shaz how you want to pursue this.

FS

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...