Strange as these guys have always been great to us and i've got compensation a couple of time very easily. But I agree, it is time to not stand for this sort of rubbish and cancel the contract as advised above with written recorded notice (a scan by e-mail to speed up the process is always helpful too). Alternatively I would go to the store and speak with the manager, start off being very nice and explain the issue and push for it to be canceled (or set a goal for compensation, I would suggest 20% as a minimum or you'll cancel, you'd get 10% without breaking sweat) - might be a good way to get the sofa you wanted and a bit of money off. Don't let them fob you off with a 10% off your next order either - they often try this. If the manager is not complying start making a bit of a fuss, if you do this at a weekend they will want you out asap as they are busy selling and don't want others to be put off. Other thing I've done before is to add on an extra item as compensation at a very reduced price (TV console I went for) at virtually cost price (65% off shop price - which is about a 40% discount when you bear in mind they usually can discount things quite a bit). Just some ideas, as using your position as leverage to get other things is never a bad thing - and saves you cancelling that sofa (if you are anything like us) that you spent a very long time trying to find!

So, I chose a very large and nice painting for our new flat, and it formed part of the way we designed it. We got the painting in the sale in early April for £125, lead time of 7-8 weeks. 8 weeks later I get an e-mail saying it has been delayed 21 weeks! (just under 6 months!). I have the right to cancel, but finding a substitue is going to be very hard and more importantly a lot more expensive. I want Dwell to pick up the difference for a subsitute product as they have failed to perform their contract. I purchased the item in store and was not presented with terms and conditions until the confirmation e-mail came through. For the purposes of discussions I believe their terms and conditions to not apply as they were terms introduced after the contract was formed. I've never been in a situation or seen one where products are not easily subsituted (normally if someone lets you down it is easy to find a replacement at a very similar cost), however a similar painting could cost £100-£200 more, especially when not on sale.... consumer law/contract law does enable you to do this, but has anyone done it with a retailer?

Thanks, we don't have the original ticket - we never recieved it, first we knew about it was a Notice to Owner, but the Notice to Owner refers to a Parking Charge (rather than a Penalty Notice), on the back it has an e-mail address for appeals and says if you were not the driver to inform them who the driver was and finally the notice states that a "Parking Charge has been issued because your vehicle was involved in breaching the stated terms and conditions of parking, which were clearly displayed and agreed to by the driver when your vehicle was parkied on private land managed by our client CP Plus Ltd. As a backup we have photos of the car park, the board which should contain a poster with the details of the car park terms and conditions is broken and the poster missing so you can easily drive in and think you are parking in the car park belonging to the building site next door which is being demolished - there is certainly enough evidence to contest, however I don't want to waste my time if this is just a CP Plus [problem] rather than a real byelaw ticket...

I don't see what your point is, this would be relevant if they had issued a pentalty charge right, wheras I've recieve a parking charge .... so are you saying CP Plus can contractually enforce a statute...

A pentalty... this is a parking charge not a penalty....

Nothing has been said about it making headlines, but i've seen plently of little stories in the middle pages of the Metro on my way to work where people have found spoiled food - or where supermarkets responses have been significantly below par. It is far from a minor mistake it undermines the entire concept of Harrods, a very premium store charging huge premiums offering what should be the very best in quality. I go to Harrods monthly to shop - and they have two faces - how they treat big spenders and how they treat tourists and this is reflected in the quality of goods too and value for money/experience. I don't think that is acceptable and I don't think the response is acceptable either, and before I went to law school I worked at M&S, "minor mistakes" were not tolerated and if people brought back expired items it was treated very seriously. When you make a purchase at Harrods you pay for the experience, the quality and the after sales service if ever needed - here all three have been below par and whilst you could say it is part of life at a Spa it should not be at Harrods - and why let them get away with it?

I know stores get huge fines if they are found to have items past their sell by date, at Marks and Spencers staff are given warnings if items out of date are found in the sections they checked. I am suprised with the response from Harrods. That being said I would do the following; 1) Take a copy of your entry and exit dates from the UK (passport stamps or plane tickets) 2) Take a photo of the Harrods box of chocolates and the expiry date 3) Submit the above evidence with a letter to Harrods setting out the date and time you bought the items, the fact it caused embarrasment and it is unacceptable for any store to sell out of date produce and whilst you no longer have the receipt, Harrods branded goods could only have been purchased from Harrods during my visit to the UK between [insert dates]. Whilst I had no intention of requesting a replacement to be sent to Malaysia, I did expect a more appropriate response and as such, unless the matter is dealt with more seriously on the second time of asking, I will use best efforts to publicise the events online and in papers - because one does not expect a) to purchase products which are past their sell by dates in a store like Harrods and b) to receive a response which is so dismissive of my claim. If they do not respond or do not reply to your satisfaction I am certain a few papers like the Metro and some tabloid papers would run little stories.

This is a parking charge, we didn't actually get the initial parking ticket, but the first notice to owner letter clearly states that "A Parking Charge has been issued". I've never heard of CP Plus being authorised to issue real Railway Byelaw tickets, what they are doing is trying to claim the ticket is one issued under statute rather than a contractual claim. They have since replied insisting that the ticket was issued under the Railway Byelaws - they refered us to sections in legislation which have nothing to do with parking. I'm not so much as concerned about where this is going, as concerned that they are incorrectly asserting they have the ability to issue a statutory penalty notice (negligently or fraudlently). Claiming that it is only the owner of the car that is liable is also wrong.... that is unless I am mistaken?

There is a contract - yes, but a verbal contract based on very simple terms, not the terms and conditions the OP refers to or upon which the tutor is trying to enforce this claim. I agree that it is always best to try to settle where possible - but the OP doesn't want to pay a penny and I think has a reasonable chance of not paying anything. Personally I would write to the tutor and say that I would pay and attend for two more lessons for the reasons set out above - I am pretty sure the tutor will not be interested in teaching the OP anymore and silence would follow!

I can't help but disagree with some of the comments above. You didn't accept the T&C's and you didn't accept them through conduct as there was no offer to accept - I will explain. Ok had you been given the contract (the offer), not signed and said nothing then you'd have accepted through conduct. However you clearly said the T&C's were not suitable as they were not flexible (clearly a rejection of the offer and once rejected an offer cannot subsequently be accepted) and he said he would be more flexible (uncertain term) and you agreed a price and proceeded. I think what we have hear is a verbal contract where the only certain terms are indeed the price. I think if those are the facts they would have a very difficult task in establishing the terms and conditions are the governing contract and therefore the notice period would not be enforceable. Contract law is based on case law, however over the years the process of formation of contracts has become pretty established, you need an offer, acceptance (though conduct will do), consideration and sufficent certainty. The facts are pretty clear, offer, rejection, parties proceeded on verbal contract with limited certain terms, oral contract is varied when the price is put up to which you agreed. There is no signed document, which will push the burden onto him as claimant (that is a practical point rather than a legal point). There are also other factors which should be considered, you will be afforded the benefit of the unfair terms regulations and there is the concept of fustration (it has been a while since I've looked into that). I think you should set out a well worded letter to that effect and explain you will defend yourself in the small claims court - post the letter on here so people can comment. I would place a fairly good bet that he wouldn't proceed with court action. Interestingly if you are moving address and he doesn't know your new address he can't serve on you.

I've just had a lengthy but sucessful battle with Countrywide Estate Agents, whereby I have extracted around £500 back from the greedy useless (rude word). The process was enlightening, they don't understand the code of practice to which they are bound by and a breach of the code = a clear cut ability to claim. (Code of Practice - to which Countrywide and most big estate agents are bound through their membership with the Property Ombudsman). I am not familiar with this forum, but there doesn't seem to be anywhere useful to stick my story. I hate estate agents and think they are useless and overcharge for everything and want others to use the process to ensure they do not put up with it either...

(Any views or experiences would be great, I haven't seen a recent CP Plus thread - not sure if they will go the full hog or not)

So, I got a parking fine from CP Plus for parking in a station car park, the board with the sign at the car park is damaged and the terms and conditions normally contained within in are missing - so no issues on defending the claim. I would have ignored, however my gf owns the car and she didn't want the hassle so we sent them an e-mail explaining I was the driver; here is the correspondance - clearly fraud... On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Enquiries wrote: Thank you for your email Miss -------. As the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) was issued under the terms of Section 219 of the Transport Act 200, Railway Byelaws, Section 14, it is the registered keeper of the vehicle, not the driver, who is liable to pay the PCN. I understand that this is not the desired outcome; however, unless further evidence is provided, the decision on this matter is final. Furthermore, while any further correspondence contesting the decision will be noted and filed, I cannot assure you of a response unless fresh evidence is provided that would have a bearing on the decision. As a gesture of goodwill, I will place the account of £120.00 on hold for 14 days to allow time for payment to be made; however, if no payment is received within this period, the matter will be taken off hold and the recovery process will proceed. Regards Nigel GouldenCollections ManagerParking Collection Services My response Nigel The notice to owner was not issued under the terms of Section 219 of the Transport Act and the procedures afforded thereunder are not included in the notice to owner. The notice to owner is explicit in the fact this is a contractual claim. Therefore either the notice to owner has been incorrectly issued, in which case it is void, or the statement below is a fraudulent misrepresentation which is a criminal offence. Please could you clarify the position in writing. Suprisingly we have had no response...

No ideas on the statutory declaration?

Your phone bill will show the time the text was sent.

I tried to reply but it didn't seem to show, so here goes again.... The National Standards for Enforcement Agents lists pregnant women as vunerable, get your doctor to confirm you were pregnant on the date your car was clamped, inform the baliffs (in writing by e-mail if possible for evidence) and the council that this has happenened. They should have never clamped your car.

No I understood - but where you were and what time you got back to the car are not the issue, what it looks like to the person deciding whether to allow the appeal or not it the issue. Whatever you say they will treat as rubbish, unless you can substantiate it. So you need to prove you started that call before 11:39. What would be helpful is proof that you arrived (i.e. parked around that time too). I.e. do you park there at that time on a regular basis, did someone else know what time you left to go there etc. If you can show you a) didn't arrive until around 11:30(ish) and also prove you didn't leave until 13:00, you could argue that it is unconsionnable for the council to asset that you parked, lingered around for a few minutes then got a fine and then decided to pay before going about your business whilst it is so clear that you (as you may usually do) left x place, parked at the location, went about paying - which due to the system takes a while - and during that time a target seeking TA gave you a ticket. If you park there on a regular basis presumably you have evidence that you normally or have paid for tickets before - again this will all help.

I suggest you call the payment line and time roughly how long it takes to pay, i.e. go through all the steps and enter your card number in wrong. It does look like you returned to your vehical at the time your ticket was being issued then made the call to try to get out of the fine so you need to discharge this argument. The only way I can see you doing this (without it being such a risk) is to prove that you would have to have been on the phone before 11:38 (i.e. paying takes on average 4 minutes, and you entered in your details wrong so it took longer). However, you may wish to contact the company that operates the payment system to see if they keep a record of the time calls were started as this could help you out a fair bit. If they don't I personally would have a stab at it, drag the process out to the independant adjuication stage where, with a bit of creativity (i.e. my call cut off the first time, I entered my details wrong, I had to move away from my car to get signal, but had started the call during the observation period) you may get lucky...

Just after a bit of advice. I parked at an out of order machine, which was also covered in substance (so you couldn't read the sign). This is obvious from the photo. My appeal rejected on the basis I "probably had a phone and could have paid that way". No problem, wait for the Notice to Owner and appeal formally. No Notice to Owner arrives and the Council claim they sent it to the correct address. I'd already written my appeal, and there is no way it got "lost" in the post. They just didn't send it. Anyway, it will be registered with the TEC and I will complete a Stat Declaration that it didn't arrive. I note some advice that they need to believe you - my concern is that it is my word against the Council, they have a record that it was posted (by ordinary mail), all I have is the two residents at the address confirming it was not recieved. It seems the more common scenario is it being sent to the wrong address. Does anyone know the liklihood (or have any experience or suggestions) of my Statutory Declaration being sucessful (or not successful). And anything else to throw into the Stat Decl to improve our chances (e.g. no history of parking contraventions/appeals of this sort). As a seperate note - I think the way the council mislead you (i.e. convince you the baliffs will be knocking on your door in days) is a disgrace, how many people must just pay out of fear and being misled is awful!