Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • 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.
  • 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 
        • 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

Unsolicited Goods - Guitar


Guest Ibanez1070
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1896 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

Guest Ibanez1070

A company with whom I hold an account and have made purchases from in the past have sent me a guitar I didnt order.

 

The guitar was added to my account with a price of £0.00.

The guitar duly arrived Addressed to me at my address, it came with an invoice that listed the guitar and a price of £0.00.

 

2 weeks pass and the company have now emailed asking for the guitar back.

 

Im fairly certain that although they may have made an error, I am covered by the unsolicited goods act and am under no legal obligation to return it.

 

Can anyone help me clarify this ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fairly certain that because they have made an error and because you are aware of it, that you are not covered by the unsolicited goods act or other related legislation.

 

I'm not in a position to look up the detail of the moment that I would say that you are not only under a duty to return it, but also until you do you are under a duty to take reasonable care of it.

 

The sender of it would be required to make arrangements to collect it or to refund you any costs of returning it to them.

 

What's the value?

Link to post
Share on other sites

A company with whom I hold an account and have made purchases from in the past have sent me a guitar I didnt order.

 

The guitar was added to my account with a price of £0.00.

The guitar duly arrived Addressed to me at my address, it came with an invoice that listed the guitar and a price of £0.00.

 

2 weeks pass and the company have now emailed asking for the guitar back.

 

Im fairly certain that although they may have made an error, I am covered by the unsolicited goods act and am under no legal obligation to return it.

 

Can anyone help me clarify this ?

 

Firstly, did you contact them pointing out their error, and offering to return the goods (at their cost). If so: they are yours provided they didn't ask for them back within 2 weeks of that letter.

 

If not, then it will depend on if a court would decide these were truly unsolicited / sent as a marketing gimmick or s*c*a*m (where they will be yours), or if it was a genuine error by the company (who you have had previous business dealings with) where they can require them back, or for you to pay.

 

I suspect that legally (as well as morally!) the latter applies. Do the right thing, though you shouldn't be out of pocket for returning it, it should be at their cost and by a suitably insured method.

 

https://consumerarbitration.co.uk/2018/11/01/unsolicited-goods-your-rights/

Edited by BazzaS
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Ibanez1070

Thanks for your reply and input.

It may well fall outside the scope of the unsolicited goods act. (which can be quite a grey area)

That does not mean I have a legal obligation to return the item or that this situation is not covered "by any other related legislation".

It was not misdelivered, it was sent in my name with a covering invoice.

 

The value is irrelevant at this point as it is supplied to me with an invoice stating its value is £0.00.

The invoice I possess and the entire electronic audit trail show that the goods were sent to me at £0.00 cost, ergo I am currently in legal possesion of the item in my understanding.

 

Be happy to hear your further thoughts. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Ibanez1070

Thank you kindly.

 

Morally im not interested in doing the right thing with regards to commerce and legally I have a bill of sale so I would "suspect" that they dont have a leg to stand on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You've had 2 replies explaining why you can't just keep it. You haven't explained why you believe they are wrong.

 

It seems that you aren't actually after advice, but only validation of your (incorrect views). Legally, you are wrong. The fact that you are also morally wrong, and aren't interested in 'doing the right thing' either: I hope they sue you, and win. Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread moved to the appropriate forum....Online Stores...please continue to post here to your thread.

 

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

Thank you kindly.

 

Morally im not interested in doing the right thing with regards to commerce and legally I have a bill of sale so I would "suspect" that they dont have a leg to stand on.

 

Youre wrong. Totally, and if the company wanted to chase it up, theyd be quite right to go for legal action to recover it.

 

I dont think theres anything more to say as you have been given the correct advice regarding the law, but y ou want to completely ignore it. The law says that if the company is aware of their mistake and notify then they can recover. Youre just choosing to ignore that hoping for a free item.

 

Whatever you choose to do, good luck. Youll need it.

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

Just because the invoice says zero charge does not mean the item has zero value. You have had previously dealings with the company so they are classed as goods sent in error, not unsolicited goods

It may be a replacement for someone else and by human error sent to.you.

Send it back, at their expense.

Stop looking for a freebie.

Edited by sgtbush
Link to post
Share on other sites

they were sent by mistake and you were a previous customer so NOT unsolicited goods.

Nothing to do with morals, it isnt yours and you must make it availbale for them to collect. they have a year to sort this out, not a fortnight.

a bill of sale merely includes the details of the transaction and it is correct, you havent paid for it and that is not the same as saying that it is of no value nor that monies are not expected. I suspect what you have been sent is actually an advice note or packing note and these are not part of the contractual terms. That makes it even harder to claim that the item is unsolicited.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...