webuyanycar is infamous for its bogus valuations. From http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12934140 £10,800 - 25% = £8,100 Here's betting that webuyanycar.com wouldn't pay even £8,100, even if that car was free of HP..

What can we do? Commercial espionage is already rife. Google's new privacy(-less) policy will only make it worse. It is becoming ever harder to query Google while staying anonymous. There used to be an anonymising service called Scroogle that proxied Google search requests to maintain privacy. However, after a series of Denial of Service Attacks and Throttling Attacks, waged over recent years by Persons Unknown, Scroogle has finally been forced off the internet. Scroogle vanished completely on 20 February, together with several related search sites. Anonymizing alternatives such as peer-to-peer Tor Onion Routing, and Proxy Chaining are also nobbled by Google. Now, Google queries sent through the anonymizing Tor network routinely result in a sinister Google error message noting "suspicious activity" ! Censorship and State Surveillance are rife today. What started as a slow but systematic erosion of Civil Liberties is now running at break-neck speed. In what must be a world first, internet users in the US and UK now find themselves blocked from visiting certain websites hosted inside P.R.C.! The Parable of the Boiling Frog has finally come true! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scroogle#Google_Doodle_for_Allan_Dulles https://www.torproject.org/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog http://en.pudn.com/about_20120220.htm

Sue him? Or better still, walk away and call it a lucky escape. The car was being simultaneously advertised in the trade press where the same seller advertises other vehicles. http://www.dealerbid.co.uk/ajax_viewcar.php?cari=willed&act=5&src=ph&carid=41560 http://trade-bids.com/details.php?id=821 http://www.dealerbid.co.uk/ajax_viewcar.php?cari=willed&act=5&src=ph&carid=13905 There were multiple 'nibble bids' from zero-rated and very low-rated bidders. This is a common strategy of shill bidders who want to discover the maximum proxy bids placed by genuine bidders. From: http://www.dealerbid.co.uk/ajax_viewcar.php?cari=willed&act=5&src=ph&carid=13905 Described as 20,000 miles in some adverts, but 33,000 miles in others.. How so? In some of those trade adverts, the same vehicle is described as: Outstanding Finance : Yes e.g. see: http://trade-bids.com/details.php?id=821 The original plate (YE58 UWT) is shown in one of those adverts. The outstanding finance is possibly recorded against that plate. £11,500 is a lot of money. It's not even a good price, given the notoriety of the sale venue, the seller's form (or lack of), and the question marks over the vehicle itself. Glass's quotes £9,500 for trade-in.. In the current climate, a private seller would be lucky to get that. Walk away, for God's sake!

How's about... I note: 1) your motor trade activity 2) the suspicious nibble-bidding on this auction lot 3) the undisclosed outstanding finance on this vehicle (B1 LYD aka YE58 UWT) 4) the odometer discrepancy (20,000 miles vs 33,000 recorded miles) and politely request that you sell the vehicle for the realistic price of £3,750.

Thanks for the update. You've obviously spent a lot of your time tracking down the fault. It sounds unlikely that a BIOS update could solve this problem. It's a shame that Aria did not demonstrate the results of its tests. I have bought from Aria in the past, so sincerely hope they sort it out for you...

warn seller that if he doesn't refund you, he will be reported to the hong kong police for theft.. they are surprisingly helpful..

You ruled out dodgy or incompatible DRAM? And a failing CPU? You weren't overclocking it, deliberately or otherwise? You used default fail-safe BIOS settings? No signs of IRQ conflicts? A poor quality or dying PSU? All cabling confirmed as good and seated properly? "sometimes did not boot" is too vague. What stage of the bootstrap was failing? Was it getting past the BIOS Pre-Operating System Test (POST). Who made the BIOS? Were there any beep indicators to isolate the fault? Have you tested the board with all known-good components (cpu/ram/video/psu) ? There are almost no serviceable parts on a modern PC motherboard. Difficult to see how anyone could 'fix it'. Hmm... So what was the fault that was purportedly repaired first time? IME. Aria have tended to be okay. That said, times is hard. What make and model of m/board is it? Is it known to have 'issues' ? You could get an independent report (at your own cost) to confirm the presence of a m/board fault. That would be a useful bargaining tool. Since the m/board was 'only' £50, the cost of obtaining a report might not warranted. I would be interested to see your youtube video. Have you asked for advice in PC building forums? good luck, edwin

I was thinking more about the statutory guarantee rights under the Sale of Goods Act. Under the Act, those rights are between the consumer and the retailer. If Comet does folds (and notably, OpCapita is only planning to keep Comet afloat for 12 months or so) then there would be no retailer to whom the buyer could turn. The manufacturer of the electrical goods is under no legal obligation to repair or replace faulty equipment. Lots of consumers discovered that the hard way, when they bought goods in the fire sales of Focus DIY and Woolworth stock. It may be worth pricing in the guarantee issue when buying electrical appliances from Comet. Paradoxically, buying an extended warranty insurance policy underwritten by a third party could be a prudent option. Of course that needn't be the insurance policy sold by OpCapita / Comet.

John Clare, formerly of DSG, is now top-dog at Comet, at least for the time being. It is rumoured that Comet is going to be wound down over the next 12 to 18 months in a 'controlled ruination'. The same Cerberus corporate demolition squad, which killed off Focus DIY, B&B, Northern Rock, the Derbyshire and Cheshire Building Societies and Woolworth plc, has been installed in Comet HQ (under the new guise of OpCapita. New name, same people). Before clearing their desks at Comet, former owners Kesa propped up the Comet pension scheme with a £50m bung. The collapse of the scheme could have been a major headache. Several hundred redundancies have been announced already, mostly in delivery logistics, call centres and the repair centre. Many more job losses are in the offing. Since a dark cloud looms overhead for Comet, the consumer should question the worth of its product warranties. [1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/9055408/John-Clare-wins-Comet-suppliers-support-ahead-of-OpCapitas-buy.html [2] http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2099320/Comet-puts-risk-450-jobs-plans-scale-house-repairs-operation.html [3] http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/nov/09/comet-sold-for-2-pounds-kesa

The buyer is entitled to a full refund. The call is the buyer's. Personally I would insist on a full refund. The motor trader has been deceitful by posing as a private seller. What other vehicle defects has he concealed? If that full refund is refused, I would report the seller to Trading Standards. It is a criminal offence to pose as a private seller when in fact the seller is "in the trade". Next, start County Court Proceedings to recover the losses. Ebay needs disinfecting of these rogue traders.

Hardly an accolade for the Legalised Loan Shark.

Personal experience is don't waste time with Ebay. It consistently fails to resolve wrongdoing, including even counterfeiting, an easily detectable crime. However, do make a reliable back-up of the auction listing. It may be necessary to show this to a Court. Ebay has a history of erasing listings when given evidence of wrongdoing. I reported a counterfeiter to ebay. They immediately deleted the 'completed' auction listing for the item (even though it was important evidence of a crime). Ebay told me to resolve it directly with the seller and insisted that to do this, I must return the counterfeit item to the seller for his inspection. Erm, nope! I sent the item to the purported manufacturer. They kindly sent me an Official Report confirming that it was a Counterfeit. The Report was sent to Ebay who didn't dispute it, but insisted that I return the counterfeit to the seller. he is still flogging counterfeits on Ebay.. *sigh* As for your car, I would approach Trading Standards. Explain that the seller claimed to be acting as an agent for a motor trader. As such, this looks like an attempt to circumvent the legal liabilities of the motor trader. According to the CAB, "the dealer may have committed a criminal offence if they...pretend to be a private seller." http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/c_secondhand_cars.pdf More info on Honest John's website. Honest John is the former motoring correspondent for the Daily Telegraph. He has waged a long newspaper campaign on behalf of the motorist. http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/faq/consumer-rights/ See also the Guidance on Unfair Trading Regulations from the Office of Fair Trading.. http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/cpregs/oft1008.pdf Can you find proof that the seller is indeed "in the trade" and was not just a "private seller"? What does his 'feedback history' in Ebay reveal? How many cars does he sell "privately" every month?!

Hmm... Not sure what to say to that.. I have a great amount of respect for the Royal Mail, its subsidiaries and its workers.. You appear to have inside knowledge, so maybe you should do the explaining... And as for the "conspiracy theory", if you want to call it that, it goes a lot deeper than just the Clearance Fee. Why does Parcelforce charge an additional 20% import VAT on the total shipping cost of items it ultimately delivers? Import VAT on shipping is a charge that Royal Mail does not impose, even though Royal Mail and Parcelforce have the same state-owned parent company. Let us also bear in mind that the destination courier is only one player in the chain of carriage of an international parcel. In fairness, the 20% Import VAT should only be imposed on the proportion of the shipping cost that ParcelForce has actually borne. Why is VAT being charged on services provided by the US Postal Service, and on the leg of the carriage that was handled by DHL-Air? By diverting imported parcels for ParcelForce delivery, rather than Royal Mail delivery, the Government receives 20% of the entire shipping cost, by way of import VAT. There is an obvious incentive to divert parcels from Royal Mail to Parcel Force, at the point of delivery. Simple Question: Why are there different taxation policies for different subsidiaries of the same state owned entity?

Amazing. Even a fire in the Reichstag building at 1m23s.

Who says? Does every school use an identical contract? Nope. Many parents will individually negotiate the terms.. "We reserve the right to move little Hamish elsewhere, without penalty, if this school doesn't suit him.." Independent schools are getting very worried. The British economy has become a basket case. Middle Englanders are now forced to tighten their purse strings. The state education system is 100% free. Moving Little Hamish out of a fee-paying school and into his local comprehensive is a very easy and immediate way to save £10k+ per annum. It's either pull Hamish out of the school or risk the house being re-possessed. No brainer. The independent school system is running shills on consumer forums to discourage parents from taking flight. One technique, as we can see above, is scaremongering. The shills are issuing vague and unattributable threats of legal action against parents who've pulled their kids. One should hope that those reconsidering their children's education will recognise these bluffs, and will seek appropriate legal advice..

Cut him some slack. He had family problems at the time.

injectors, snorters, smokers, it matters not. Travelodge operates a strict anti-discrimination policy. Just for the record, it wasn't the Travelodge in York.. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1347839/Travelodge-killers-3-female-convicted-murderers-jobs-hotel.html

Tilt your cards a little more sweetheart, so that everyone can see your hand!!

We stayed in a Travelodge on the coast. We discovered that the local social services department was using it as a half-way house for drug addicts and the mentally ill. Conversations in the lift with other 'guests', some long-stay, were eye-opening, to put it mildly. When we checked in, the receptionist explicitly asked whether we were "smokers or non-smokers" ? (Truthful) reply: "We're both non-smokers, but why do you ask? Surely smoking is illegal inside the building anyway?" Her reply: "Yes it is illegal, but many of our guests smoke regardless, so we try to segregate them into different rooms" !

As if anyone would doubt otherwise!

The 'new' law on cancelling Continuous Payment Authorities deserves greater publicity. Thanks to Sequenci's article and the Consumer Action Group, it is getting that publicity. [1] The power entitling the payer to directly instruct his bank to stop a Continous Payment Authority is contained in Regulation 55 of The Payment Services Regulations 2009. [2] That Regulation came into force on 1 November 2009, over two years ago now. So the law is not strictly new at all. Even now, few borrowers know about the protections contained in this new Law. Unsurprisingly, the Predatory Lenders have no plans to enlighten them. There are even rumours that the Lenders are using covert 'assets' to propagate drivel to deliberately mislead borrowers! [1] http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?850-Continuous-Payment-Authorities-How-to-stop-them [2] http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2009/209/pdfs/uksi_20090209_en.pdf

Essentially, the Charity has lost out. Instead of trying to recoup the treatment costs on behalf of the Charity, you tried to purloin those funds for your own benefit. At least, that's how some cops and maybe the beak would see it. Maybe that could be your act of penitence - to reimburse the Charity out of your own funds?

The seller's bank certainly will not disclose his address to you. The electoral register is probably your best bet. If the man lives locally, maybe call in at the Electoral Registration Office of the local council and ask to inspect the Electoral Register for the seller's road. Council Officers are under strict instructions over the trawling you are allowed, and are not allowed to do. You can't, by law, go in and say "I wish to search the entire register for the City of Bedford looking for a Miss Bedelia Beddows." However, if you provide a street name to search, you are allowed to examine the relevant page(s) and you are allowed to make hand-written notes (i.e. to note the house number of the LandRover salesman) for the purposes of serving legal documents on him. If the man isn't local to you then you could either visit the offices of his Local Authority to search the E.R. there, or if you're lucky, you may find his full postal address in the 192.com / UK-INFO database. That database combines the latest edited (opt-out) register with historic (unedited) electoral registers dating from 2002, iirc. It's likely if the car had been sitting in the same spot for six+ years that the man would be found in those old electoral registers. As for whether it's worth the bother of going to court for £220... hmm... arguably not. what were the terms of the sale? is he just a private individual? or is he 'in the trade', whether disclosed or not? if so, you usually have more rights as a buyer. Any car that has been sitting for six years is likely to be a wreck. In the scheme of things, the corroded gas valve could be a minor issue. Did he supply a recent MOT with this vehicle? If so, I would scrutinise it closely, and if not, maybe put the car through an MOT, ASAP, if only to identify further undisclosed faults. Good luck.

Hehe! Love you, too! Good luck with the undercover move!

It's not just letters.. it's parcels up to 2 kilograms.. And... most importers have no choice in the courier(s) used, nor in the routing of the parcel. Sellers in the USA simply take their parcels to the local office of the US Postal Service. None of the shipping options identify the courier that will be used to ultimately deliver the parcel in the destination country. It is in the commercial interests of the state-owned Royal Mail Group to divert international parcels for local delivery by different subsidiaries of the group for revenue purposes. Parcels (weighing up to 2 kilograms) can be arbitrarily diverted from delivery by Royal Mail personnel, to delivery by employees of ParcelForce Worldwide. ParcelForce Worldwide is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Royal Mail Group Limited, which is 100% owned by Royal Mail Holdings plc, which is wholly state-owned. Of course, officially, parcel routing is only determined for logistical reasons. However, there are considerable financial incentives to override logistics. The Government receives significantly higher revenues (£5.50 more in Duty Collection Fee, and typically an extra 20% in Import VAT on the cost of the item, its shipping and insurance) when a parcel is delivered by the wholly state-owned ParcelForce than it does when a parcel is delivered by the wholly state-owned Royal Mail. Can that be fair? That said, if it helps to plug the black hole in the Royal Mail pension fund, then hmm.... needs must?! In truth, it's probably just another ruse to slap the Royal Mail into better shape in readiness for privatisation by NM Rothschild & Son.