Hi Dx, Thanks for the reply. No the car not on finance but regretting not taking it out on finance now. I dropped the car of to the dealer today . Is it worth me emailing them about my intention about rejecting the car if it's not fixed first time round or shall I leave it and see what happens.

I bought a approved used mercedes 2.5 months ago and it has a problem. The problem is the car is slowly losing coolant somewhere which isn't visible. When I took the car in to a main dealer to have it checked as it's still under warranty they couldn;t find any visible leaks but advised me to rebook the car in for further diognestics as they agreed their is a problem somewhere. As I had the car only 2.5 months I decided to take it back to the dealers I bought the car from give them the opportunity to fix it. I'm wondering if the problem turns out to be major such as head gasket problem or the problem still persits after they say they have repaired it, am I within my rights to ask for replacement car or a refund as it wasn't sold to me as it isn't of satisfactory quality. If so what the best way to approach this with the dealer. the car only 1.5 years old with only 11,200 miles on the clock. I paid nearly £25k for it.

Hi thanks for your replies. I tried the above methods and it dosen't seem to work. I took the TV into an approved Sony repiar shop and they have confirmed the LCD panel is faulty and it will costs circa £400 to fix. The shop confirmed they have so many Sony Bravia Tvs comming in with the same problem belives it's a manufacturing fault but he cannot state that in his report as he will risk sony taking away his license as an approved repairer. I was woundering if I have a case under the reasonable length of time clause under the SOGA.

Hi, Yep thats the link but link is without chairs, mine came with matching chairs which pushed the price up to about £600. The item was paid via paypal so not sure what protection I have on this.

Hi. Back in June 2014 I purchased a table & Chairs set of ebay from Furniture Choice uk for £600. On Saturday when I was extending the dining table for the second time in two years, the tension wire snapped. This is causing the table to pretty much slide back and forth freely. I contacted Furniture Choice uk for some advice and they pretty much said to me they can't do anything for me as it's past the 12 month warranty period. Surely this can't be right. Is there anything I can go back to them with because I would of thought a £600 table should last longer then 23 months.. Any advice much appreciated. Link to the table I bought is below. h****P://w$£.furniturechoice.co.uk/Dining-Room-Furniture/Dining-Tables/Extending-Dining-Tables/Tokyo-White-High-Gloss-Extending-Dining-Table_250107.htm

Hi, I need some advice please if you don't mind. I received a PCN from Newham Council for parking in a disabled bay on Easter Sunday. The problem I had at the time was it was raining quiet heavy with some surface water flooding which made the actual disabled bay harder to make out. I based my appeal on the grounds that the bay hasn't been maintained and was clearly weathered over time with the markings on the bay faded. Last week I received a letter from the council notifying me that my appeal was unsuccessful and I have 14 days to pay the fine half price or the full amount after the 14 days. Now this is the thing, The letter of rejection is date 20th April 2016 , and the envelope that is came in was dated 27th April 2016 which I presume was the postal date, i received the letter on the 29th April. This gives me 5 working days to pay the fine which isn't fair at all. Do you think if I have a case on this reason in having the fine cancelled? P.S How comes I have to wait for a NTO before I can appeal against their rejection letter, I'm sure before you had the choice of taking the appeal straight to PATAS or has it changed. PCN BOLEYN ROAD.pdf

Update: Thanks for all your helpful replies . I'm certain I will revisit this thread again in the future as their are some really useful tips on here. Much appreciated. Even through It was a cheap laptop I was expecting it to run at least MS office, that was the last straw when I couldn't get it to install , During installation of office the thing completely froze up and I had to uninstall it so I can get some sort of control back on the laptop. This afternoon I boxed up the laptop neatly and I took it down to PC World IN beckon for a refund or exchange , once there I explained the situation to them with the problems I had , at first they didn't want to know as the laptop was still functioning. After getting to know the technician a little and talking about football whilst he was checking the laptop, he agreed to refund the money back on to a gift card so I can choose another laptop, normally they are not allowed to do this as the machine was still working. I ended up buying a HP laptop for nearly £560 quid,even though I had to pay a little extra but was worth it as it's super fast. I know PC World and Currys get bad press most of the time but they helped me out big time on this one. One lesson i've learnt from all of this, 'Never buy a cheap laptop'

I bought a new Acer laptop ( v5 122p-win 8.1) from PC world on Sunday, after using it for about a day, I've found the laptop very very slow and sluggish, it get to a point when the laptop just becomes unresponsive, the internet is very slow also and I can't do basic taks. , I've delated all the pre installed apps that came with the laptop and it's made no difference what so ever, the cpu is constantly reaching 100%. I wanted to know if I had a legal right of requesting either a refund, exchange, or by me paying extra for a better spec machine. Because I bought this in store the distant selling regs don't apply to me.

claim it all back m8, i'm in the process of claiming baqck my charges from capital one, they owe £675 but they offered me only £165 now i have put my claim through MCOL hoping they would refund me all the charges. there loads of info on this here m8. Abit of searching around you will find it.

Hi m8, some bits were copied and pasted from your letter, hope you don't mind m8 (i'll buy you a virtual beer ), saved me valuable time (very well written by the way:)). As for the 14 days, i think i made a mistake however don't think that will make a huge difference, as my other arguments are valid such as better signage, better pictures etc. Do you think I now have a even stronger case because newham council sent me the wrong cctv images of another car?

Thought I come in and say Hi to everyone, as I find this such a useful and friendly site.

Hi guys, I hope someone could shed some light on this - on 11 july I received a PCN through my door for alledgly being in a bus lane. From the pcn the picture attached shows my car two wheels (front and back) going over the bus lane for only a split second whilst I was stuck in traffic. The day after I received the pcn I phoned the council to send me clearer images of my vehicle, the next day I did receive close up of my car but the images supplied does not show my car in the bus lane and the close up does not show my registration number. Today I received another set of images but this time its not my car it's meant for someone else. I'm sure this error makes my pcn void am I right?? Here is the 1st letter I wrote to the council to have my PCN cancelled because its unlawful. I was issued a PCN on the grounds that I was in a Bus Lane on Barking Road East Ham E6 on 20/06/2008 at 18:22 , however from the PCN which I received dated 11/07/2008 I strongly object to this penalty and will take it further if need be. I object to this PCN issued against me on the following grounds: 1. The CCTV footage on the PCN is very unclear and can’t make out which vehicle is mine from the picture I don’t see any vehicles driving in the bus lane. 2. Section 1 of the ‘’Road Traffic Offenders act 1988’’, requires a notice of intended prosecution to be sent within 14 days. If a PCN is sent after 14 days it can not act as a notice of intended prosecution, and it is my opinion that you can not legally continue. My alleged contravention took place on 20/06/2008 and the date I received the PCN was 11/07/2008. ( I have included a section of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 for your information) 3. Under the ‘’Code of Practice for Operation of CCTV Enforcement Cameras in the (London/Royal/Borough/City) of (Borough)’’ver. 3.2 June 2006 - Section 2.4 11 in the above code of practice states that: “Each contravention will be reviewed on the working video to decide whether it is clear and indisputable. Appropriate details of the vehicle and circumstances involved in clear and indisputable contraventions are recorded, and registered keeper details obtained. A PCN is then sent to the registered keeper.” My PCN is not clear and you cannot make out which vehicle is mine. The bus lane is clearly visible in the picture but no vehicles are actually in the bus lane restricting access to buses. All you can see is a typical Friday Barking Road traffic. “”Section 2.4.12 it states that All PCNs are to be issued within 14 days of the contravention and should be sent by first class post. The PCN is deemed to have been served when it would be delivered in the ordinary course of post”. A Valid PCN should have been sent to me on 3/07/2008 and not on the 11/07/2008 eight days after the 14 day expiry period. A document published by the Department for Transport “Provisional Guidance on bus lane (including Tramway) enforcement in England outside London (November 2005 revised 2008) Section 6.19.under ‘’Serving of Penalty Charge Notices’’ In this paragraph it states the following: ‘’In London, authorities have set themselves a voluntary target of 14 days from the date of the contravention” I don’t see why Newham council has the right to opt out from this as they have volunteered to this. 4. 4) There are no lawful signs warning of camera enforcement placed at the beginning of the bus lane in Barking Road as you come off the A13. London Councils’ Transport and Environment Committee has approved the adoption of the Code of Practice on CCTV Enforcement by all London Councils (including Newham Council). This Code of Practice (version 3.2 – June 2006) states in paragraph 2.3.5: “Relevant camera enforcement signs should be displayed in areas where the system operates. The signs will not define the field of view of the cameras but will advise that CCTV camera enforcement is taking place in the area.” This means that drivers enter the CCTV field of view without having passed or seen a warning sign placed for their attention. 5. Under paragraph 3 (a) of S4 of the London Local Authorities Act 1996 a PCN is required to state "the grounds on which the council believe that the penalty charge is payable with respect to the vehicle". This PCN does not do so. Part of the grounds must by definition be to describe the location in which the alleged contravention occurred. The alleged contravention is described as "being in a bus lane in Barking Road at 18:22:00 on 20/6/2008 by camera operator 911 who was observing real time images from a roadside camera. . . " Barking Rd contains a number of bus lanes and it is therefore necessary for Newham Council to state which one is involved in the alleged contravention in order to discharge their statutory obligations. They have not done so. Newham Council may seek to argue that it can be determined from the images, however this is not reasonable. It is not appropriate for Newham Council to rely on motorists interpreting their images and inferring from them the location in which they are alleged to have committed a contravention. In any event the inclusion of images is not a statutory requirement and Newham Council obligation is to "state" certain matters and this means "provide in words". Notwithstanding the above, the balance of this appeal is based on my inference as to the location and the provision of my arguments is not to be taken as a waiver or estoppels of my right to amend my representations should Newham Council seek to argue that the location I have inferred is in fact incorrect. On the above basis I therefore request that you cancel this PCN as it is un-lawful. could I also suggest that Newham council retrain all of its CCTV operators so they follow its strict code of procedures in future which has to be legally followed at all times before issuing a PCN to motorist and should not be used as a tool to generate revenue which it sadly does. Also better CCTV Enforcement signs are displayed on Barking Road legally and at present it clearly does not. 6. The picture of the alleged contravention supplied on the PCN do not conform to The Bus Lane Enforcement Camera Handbook published by the Home Office. This states as an “operational requirement” in item 5.1.2 that: “Every image of the offence shall show, in addition to the offending vehicle, in the order given: the date in days, month, and year, the time in hours, minutes, and seconds, the day of the week, location and frame count from the beginning of the recording. The data shall be imprinted on the image or included in the violation record at the time the offence is recorded.” The images do not show all the required data and do not show it in the order given. Only “approved devices” can be used for CCTV enforcement. The failure to show the correct information and in the correct order must mean that the device used was not approved and therefore not lawful and the images are inadmissible to show any contravention or alleged contravention. The failure of the PCN to show lawful images renders it void and therefore there is no evidence of a breach of the bus lane order or regulation. Further the stills do not conform to the requirement in the Code of Practice on CCTV Enforcement (item 2.5.24) that “each still image will be given a unique serial number” as none is shown. Should these representations be rejected then please treat this as a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 for the following documents: a) A copy of the bus lane order or regulation giving effect to the Bus Lane. b) A copy of the Safety Audit for this road layout. c) A copy of the engineer’s scale diagrams showing the layout of this Bus Lane, the road markings and the signage (including warnings of camera enforcement). d) Copies of any approvals of deviations of signage from TSRGD. e) Logs of maintenance visits verifying existence and condition of the signs. f) Certification of type approval of the CCTV device. g) Details of the number of times that the videotape used has been degaussed and reused. h) A copy of the Camera Enforcement logbook recording the alleged contravention. i) Copies of the still images showing all the required information in the correct order. j) The number of PCNs issued by Newham Council in respect of this location. k) The number of PCNs issued by Newham Council in respect of this location and cancelled by them following informal challenges. l) The number of PCNs issued by Newham Council in respect of this location and cancelled by them following formal appeal to them. m) The number of PCNs issued by Newham Council in respect of this location and cancelled following appeal to a PATAS adjudicator. n) The number of PCNs issued by Newham Council in respect of this location and not pursued by them for any other reason. Yours Sincerely have I got a good chance of having this cancelled. And is there anu ideas what I can put in my second letter, this is what I have wrote so far: Following my telephone conversation with one of your operator on 12/07/2008, I requested clearer images showing my vehicle being in a bus lane because the picture attached on the original PCN was not clear. Your operator acknowledged my request and informed me that she will be sending out clearer images of my vehicle by first class post. Today on 22/07/2008 I received a set of images showing a vehicle being in a bus lane however the images I receive does not show my car being in a bus lane but shows another vehicle, in which I find careless of Newham Council. The images received show a vehicle with a registration number of ‘D...... My registration is T......, nobody in this household owns a vehicle with the above registration number. I suggest you cancel this PCN as you have not been supplied with correct and clear details of the contravention in the first place. Please note: This letter is my 2nd Correspondence to Newham Council concerning this matter. 1st Correspondence was sent by post on 17/07/2008 & by fax on 22/07/2008. (I have included my first correspondence with this letter)