Jump to content

Bimmer_boi

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bimmer_boi

  1. I bought a car at the beginning of this month, telling the salesman that I wanted a specific car that had one owner and a full service history. He came back and actually said to me "I've found the perfect car for you" I should have realised this wasn't true. Firstly, the car had been MOT'd less than a month ago, yet within 1500 miles, the replace brakepads message has come up. Secondly the handbrake doesn't engage until its almost at the top of its limit. Quite how this passed an MOT is beyond me. Next I find out that the car has had three previous owners:-x I phone them up and apart from having to travel 40 miles to their own workshop to have the brakepads and sensors replaced, they have fobbed me off with the following letter: Further to our telephone conversation of ***** regarding the previous keepers of the vehicle that you have purchased, I have investigated your concern and it would appear that a genuine administrative error has been made. We had received the vehicle into stock without all relevant documentation and were waiting to receive these so that we could update our computer system. On receiving the log book into stock, you had already made your purchase and the file holding the details was passed to your business manager without updating. I can assure you that this difference would not have had any affect on the price that you paid for the vehicle. blah blah. Now, I haven't mentioned the price would have been different, they have admitted they haven't sold me the car I wanted and now I have a car that I will have trouble selling in the future. They fixed the brakepads, but not the handbrake and I had to go to their premises to get even that. Discuss the legalities please. What would you do?
  2. I don't know what you mean:rolleyes: Have you contact details for the CSA? Im already speaking to someone at the SRA
  3. Well, after a period of quiet, I received not one but two letters. The first arrived 28th November with a postmark on the envelope of 24th November and a date on the letter of the 20th from Roxburghe drawing my attention to two aspects of case law. Namely: Watteau v fenwick (1893) and Combined Parking Solutions v S J Thomas (2008) I've been able to find out about the first, which is complete rubbish when applied to this, but I haven't been able to find out about CPS v S J Thomas, can someone with access to Butterworths enlighten me? This letter ends with a stark warning about considering my actions carefully and provide the driver details by return of post. If I fail to do so, they will have no alternative but to continue the action against me. This letter is from Steve Dargonne. The second is from Michael Sobell again, telling me I have a final warning that despite many (really???) attempts to obtain payment from me, I have chosen to withold settlement of the amount £140. Im advised that if Im in any doubt as to the seriousness of the situation, I should seek independant legal advice as the consequences of litigation can be far-reaching, such as: Substantial legal costs and statutory interest being added My name being listed on the register of judgments affecting my chances of further credit in the future Seizure of my assets by bailiffs An order to obtain information from judgment debtor It is my responsibility to repay this account immediately and they are putting me on notice that they will refer the matter in seven days. Im assured "that this matter will not go away without solution or resolution" They then ask that if I do not wish to incur the consequences of COURT ACTION (their emboldening) I ,must pay the amount claimed immediately. Continue to ignore or shall I send the harassment letter?
  4. It is the drivers responsibility to update the details at the DVLA, that correct, however, if they were bailifs, then a simple "this matter is in dispute, please refer back to the originator" should have sufficed. Would you give money to someone who just knocked on your door without explaination or good reason and demand money? I would have at least called the police.
  5. I like the sound of this. Could you mind writing a draft letter outlining the broken regulations and I will do my damndest to put this joker out of business.
  6. No Idea really. Im merely a humble IT contractor, so I can only give advice on computers and servers. What I also am is highly vindictive and should this progress to harassment stage, I will investigate all possible avenues into causing as much hassle for them as possible.
  7. I was advised by a trainee barrister not to simply ignore the letters. In His letter Micael Sobell claims to be a solicitor trading under the name of Graham White
  8. Well, I received this, which I thought was a bit unusual for several reasons. Firstly, it states I was recently sent a NTRK, which I wasn't, this is the first corespondence Ive seen, secondly, the letter arrived the day after the impossibly short 7 days in which I had to act. Secondly, it states that if I want a copy of the ticket that was never attached, I have to pay £10:| I wrote a letter in response saying that I hadn't received the stated correspondance and that I would be contesting this very strongly. I was careful not to state who the driver was and that I would require evidence of the "offence" being commited. Today, they rang my Dads house and left an answerphone message saying "I had to get in touch" You will note that the date of the letters is exactly as they "run out" of time, althoug, they are obviously posted with as little time as possible in which to act. A basic check at the Solicitors Regulation Authority using the number at the bottom of the letter returns no results, which I thought strange. What is the next step? Im not ringing them back, I have sent a letter stating that its the end of the matter as far as I am concerned. Do I wait for them to send me a letter back?
  9. Yes, but can you use it as evidence? IE present it to the court?
×
×
  • Create New...