Hi Reading your post I do have grave misgivings about claiming for "....a full MOT, Full Service and all repairs paid for". To me this smacks of a fraudulent claim (with the possible criminal repercussions too) as you previously suggest the car is not actually damaged. To my mind the only recompense you're entitled to is for any damage actually caused by the utility company when they entered your premises (if they did, see below) and removed your car. Assuming your car was parked on your property and not on the road outside, maybe a better course of action would be to inform the police that your premises had been entered (don't forget to get a Crime Number from them) and then, whether they take action or not, to sue the utility company for trespass.

Hi gemspan Just had a look at the Tiscali homepage (I'm a Broadband customer of theirs, by the way) and it seems that the 1p per minute offer does have 'conditions' attached. Ths is what they say: "Time online is charged at just 1p a minute all weekend*, 2p a minute evenings (6pm-6am Mon-Fri) and 4p a minute during weekdays (6am-6pm Mon-Fri) from a BT landline. Charges from other telephone providers may vary. * Bank and Public Holidays are not classified as weekend periods for this product. Charges will be applied to your account at the standard Mon - Fri rates." The bold print is Tiscali's, not mine! In you post you mention Toucan and I assume this is who provides your telephone service. Tiscali's offer is for BT landlines and they do say charges from other telephone providers may vary.

Glad to have been of help, hackersons. Just remember though, the 40 day clock started ticking on the day they received your original request!

Sounds a bit like the holiday accommodation from hell!! From reading what you've said it seems as though your contract for this cottage was with Country Cottages as you mention getting a £50 'gesture of goodwill' from them. If I were you I would contact my local Trading Standards office (number probably in the 'phone book under your local city or county council) and explain the whole saga to them and see what they suggest. They may well be interested in how the description by Country Cottages differed from reality too for a possible breach of the Trades Description Act (amongst others). Anyway, Shella, have a word with TS as a first step and see what advice they can offer. Hope this helps a bit.

mmmmmmmm! Strange innit?? Can't think why a firm would rather take a sales call than one from some 'ijutt' who's likely to be complaining!!!

....or, alternatively write to them and remind them of their obligation under Section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998. Say that if the do not supply you, the Data Subject as described in the Act, with the information within the prescribed 40 day period, you will commence action against them in the County Court. It might just 'concentrate their minds' a little!

I agree with what's already been said that this looks very much like a Trade Sale and I think further comment along those lines from me is superfluous. Except, perhaps, to say I would copy everything to your credit card company. I am somewhat curious about two things though. Firstly, how did he invoice the car to you? Was it a company name, or his own? If the invoice had a box you had to sign for VAT purposes then it was definitely a sale through a VAT registered person. If not, then a 'dropped hint' of a letter to the VAT-man might not come amiss. Secondly, the garage you went to to pay via your credit card sounds somewhat suspicious to me. Does the name on the confirmation slip for the payment match the seller's name on the invoice? If 'yes' then all could be well. However, if 'no' then my suspicions grow apace as it sounds as though he was using a 'mate' to clear the credit card and I wouldn't like to speculate who sold you the car in law. Just a few more things to 'impress' your trader with if things don't look as though they're going your way might help you too. If the man is selling second-hand cars from his home he will still need to be registered for VAT in exactly the same way as if he had a garage business of his own. VAT is charged on used cars, but not in the same way as for other goods and services. The amount of VAT included in the sale price is not seperately itemised as it is with other sales as used cars sold through a VAT registered business are deemed to be 'VAT inclusive'. Also, the VAT-man requires that very precise records have to be kept in a special 'VAT book' of all transactions. If the seller is trading in used cars from his home then, as far as I am aware, he needs planning permission from the local authority to do so. I'm assuming he's got it! Finally, if all is really going badly for you and no acceptable resolution seems possible, threaten him with Trading Standards. You have already got legitimate grounds as your credit card will almost certainly be subject to the Consumer Credit Act and Trading Standards are the legitimate authority for administering this.

I thought so too, in fact I'm 99.999% sure they are!!!

With the greatest respect, jamesbond, I think you're missing the point slightly. Sony, Nintendo and, in fact, any manufacturer can 'impose' whatever terms they choose on a retailer in return for 'allowing' him to sell their products. The return of faulty goods to the manufacturer for repair is perfectly sensible in many cases. However, none of these 'terms' can take away or alter a consumer's rights that are enshrined in law. Unless I'm very wrong, the purchaser's contract in law is solely with the retailer who sold the consumer the goods in the first place. It therefore surely follows that, if the consumer so wishes, the onus (and cost, if any) of returning faulty goods to the manufacturer and/or exchanging them rests with the retailer and not the consumer. Whether the manufacturer chooses to repair, exchange for new or exchange for 're-manufactured' is between the retailer and manufacturer. However, if, under the SOGA, the consumer is entitled to a 'new' replacement, then nothing the manufactruer or retailer can say or do can take away that right.

Hi MF1! Yes, I agree, you do seem to be getting lots of conflicting advice with some advocating going back to Nintendo, whilst others saying you should deal only through TrUs. The advice you've had from Consumer Direct is good and correct - deal only with TrUs. In law your contract is with Toys R Us and not Nintendo! Nintendo, as manufacturers of the DS unit, may well give you a warranty with the unit but that does not in any way replace the supplier's obligations in law with you, the retail purchaser. To me the facts are very clear-cut; you purchased by retail a Nintendo DS from Toys R Us about six months ago. Within that six-month timespan the unit the unit developed a fault, namely a hinge broke and you reported the fault to your supplier within six months of purchase. It has been discovered that there exists an internet website which contains numerous other instances of this fault occurring on other similar units thus probably indicating either a weakness in design or in manufacture. The Sale of Goods Act is very clear that, if a fault occurs within six months of purchase of the goods, it is the seller's responsibility to prove the fault was not present at the time of purchase. (After six months it then becomes the purchaser's responsibility to prove the fault existed at the time of purchase.) As I've previously said, I would have no more nonsense from the supplier but would simply, politely and firmly point out to them in writing (to their Head Office) their obligations under the law, i.e. they must either replace or repair the faulty unit they supplied, They must also do it at their expense. No if's, no but's! It's the law and any 'guarantee' given by supplier or manufacturer cannot take your rights away from you! Go as far as to sugest they take advice on the SOGA from their corporate legal counsel if they doubt the correctness of what you say. The question of the rudeness of the store manager is a completely separate matter altogether and, in this regard, I would be surprised if TrUs do not make some recompense to your daughter. As Bookworm before me has said, I too will happily have a look at your letter if you'd care to post it on here.

As others have said before me, one of the commonest 'frailties of human nature' is the ability to lie when it suits!

Hi buglelight. Before getting to the point of this post, may I offer my deepest sympathies to you and your family over this tragic loss. I have to disagree slightly with Bookworm over 'Alcoholism' not appearing on a Death Certificate. Some twelve years ago someone very close to me died in hospital in the Midlands and, when I went to register the death, one of the three causes listed (not, I agree, the main cause) by the hospital doctor was 'alcoholism'. This was accepted by the Registrar and duly appeared on the Death Certificate issued to me. There was some discussion between the Registrar and me about this at the time and she was extremely apologetic at having to record it, but explained she had no choice as the hospital doctor had included it. I feel sure that, had I agreed to a post mortem as the hospital suggested, the word would not have been present and that this was their way of making their point over my refusal. It was, and still is, distressing but is something I've learned to live with.

Just a thought, but one way of 'killing two birds' is to claim back your charges and make the removal of the Default a condition of your acceptance of their offer. Have a good look around this site and you'll see numerous threads concerning the removal of these Defaults to help you along. Among these is an extremely good one from SurlyBonds.

I guess that all this just goes to prove that whatever wheeze the banks etc can dream up to make life difficult for their customers, there's always an antidote too!!

Extremely annoying though I realise it is for you, I think Woolies have acted in a quite responsible way in refunding your card. They could have done as so many do and hold on to your money until you shout loudly enough for it back. I guess that, in some ways, it makes a refreshing change! Incidentally, just diversifying slightly, I'd love to know where all the goods 'lost in transit' by retailers end up; there must be a very big store full of them somewhere!!! I’d like to bet there's some good bargains to be had if anyone could ever find it!!!

I'd hazard a guess that your 'ERCs' have been calculated under the 'Rule of 78s' and that as such, as Gizmo111 says, are perfectly correctly allowed under the CCA.

There's a number of answers to the questions you've raised, Aniseed. Most have been answered correctly already for you and so I won't bore you with repetiton. However, the question about whether you should have been sold a car without a tax disc (VED) by the dealeship does warrant a further comment . As patdavies says above, it is quite legal to sell a car without a tax disc, but have a look at the invoice they will have given you for the car as well. If there's no mention of taxing it or any charge for 'Licence Fee' (or similar wording), then they have sold it to you 'without tax' and left the responsibility for getting a disc to you. One thing does puzzle me somewhat. You say you've had a letter from the DVLA reminding you that your tax disc expires at the end of November. This suggests that not only have the DVLA been notified of your details as the new 'Registered Keeper', but also that it did have a current tax disc from June 06 and that it has not been surrendered. Also, as your FPN from the police is only for 'not displaying' it suggests that the police did a check with the DVLA before issuing the FPN and were told it was currently taxed, thus the offence of 'not displaying' is correct. Had a disc not been in existence it is more likely you would have been facing having the car clamped, towed away and a hefty charge to get it back too (plus the cost of not only a new disc, but penalties for the time between when the last one expired and now as well)! Do check your invoice, it is just possible the dealership have 'forgotten' to give it to you!

Firstly, feefofum, my deepest sympathy for the loss of your mother. To answer question 3 first, definitely do not wait! That can only make matters worse and, possibly, result in you having to pay back more than if you took HBOS to task over their seeming 'negligence'. I would guess that, although they may well try to charge you a higher rate of interest beacuse of the 'non-payment', they will back down once you explain all the facts surrounding you not realising their mistake earlier. Equally, I think you've little chance of only paying back the amount you borrowed, despite the error committed by HBOS. Be realistic to yourself, banks make their money (theoretically anyway) by lending money and charging interest on the loan. What you're thinking would be something like committing heresy for a bank! Why not write to them (write, do not 'phone as there's no record of who said what and when it was said in a 'phone call) and explain the position fully. Even better would be to enclose a cheque for, say, two months payments as well as that way you're showing a willingness to pay which can only count in your favour when you come to settle. Hope this helps a bit.

OK MF1, my thoughts are that this is a case for a classic 'British compromise'! On one hand your statutory rights are clear: it's the retailer's responsibility to either make financial recompense or to make sure a repair is satisfactoriy effected and without any burden of proof falling upon you. On the other hand it's your little girl who is really 'suffering' by being without her beloved Nintendo DS. Bookworm is quite right in my view; no more conversations with TrUs, everything from now on should be in writing, no if's, no but's!!! Everything!!!!! I would write (Recorded Delivery, of course) to the lady who 'phoned you form TrUs. Explain very fully what your rights are but suggest you will be prepared to spare them the cost and unhelpful publicity, (make sure you tip off the local press if it does go to court - 'sob story' about a little girl who's been 'deprived of her beloved Nintendo DS'), associated with a court case. Offer to settle the dispute by means of a replacement DS and some tangible gift by way of appeasement for your little girl for not only the loss of her DS, but also for the rudeness and 'suffering' she underwent with the store manager. If they've any sense at all (which, truthfully seems doubtful at the moment) they'll happily settle. Just my opinion anyway, but I hope it helps!

Might be a silly question (and I apologise in advance if it is) but are the three remaining girls contemplating replacing the (soon to be leaving) fourth? If not, would they as this would possibly solve the problem?

As a union shop steward myself I would echo very strongly the advice above; put everything in writing and use the company's grievance procedure. Anything that follows this is dependent on the grievance procedure being exhausted first.

Aw!!! You're making me blush!!! But seriously, I'm pleased a result looks to be on the horizon for you. Just as an 'after thought', when you write to GE, (in view of the importance of this letter, I'd send it Recorded Delivery if I were you), make sure you ask for the removal of any 'markers' they might have put on any credit file of your husband's with a CRA. After all, it's not your fault Gates failed to fulfil their part of the bargain and pay GE, is it? When you make contact with Gates I would stress to them too that they should make clear to GE that the reason for the non-payment of the monthly payment was Gates' fault, not your husband's. Try to get Gates to copy this letter to you s well so that you have 'proof' should it be needed later.

Don't have anything more to do with the salesman concerned, it looks as though he 'took a flyer' by agreeing to take the Warrior as a 'part exchange' despite his comments about 'treating the two transactions seperately'. Whether this was off his own bat (unlikely in view of the circumstances) or by agreement with his superior is debateable. Gates are quite a large concern and I'm sure this is not the way they do business usually. Make an appointment to see the General Manager/Director of the branch concerned. Take with you all the necessary paperwork and explain the situation. Also, take proof (bank statement and cheque stub will probably be OK at this stage) that the cheque has been cashed. (Incidentally, who was the cheque your husband handed over payable to? Gates or GE?) If it was me I would also take with me a letter setting out the facts and setting a timescale for reaching an agreement satisfactory to me (a Template Letter could be amended for this). If GE haven't been informed then they are right in what they're saying.

I have an Evesham computer (tower as opposed to laptop) via the HCI scheme and through my employer. Initially I found their service good (a faulty cd drive was replaced at my home without any serious problems). However, a fault developed with the keyboard and this lead to a few heated arguments with Evesham (which I eventually won). They were quoting me clauses from their HCI Contract which were completely at odds with the copy I had signed and been supplied with the computer. Having ignored several complaints from me and refused to supply me a new keyboard (unless i paid for it) I eventually took the matter up with one of my employer's directors (the same director who had been the main company contact during the purchase/delivery phase). Evesham ignored two approaches from him too. Eventually, having 'borrowed' a keyboard from a friend (I was damned if I was paying a penny for one), Evesham 'phoned me. After some discussion I sent them a copy of my contract by post and, when they read it, they had to admit I was right and they were wrong. The story didn't quite end that simply though. When the new keyboard and mouse arrived it was a different make to that originally supplied and it took two more 'phone calls to rectify this. Would I have another Evesham? Possibly, maybe, I dunno!! However, this doesn't answer the OP's questions. This is what I would do: 1. Log the fault with Consumer Direct. Explain the full history of these too. Doing this will give you an independent source of confirming dates etc. 2. Contact my credit card company. Explain the whole problem to them (without embellishment) and say that I will be looking to them for redress under the Consumer Credit Act. Also, once they've acknowledged the complaint I would keep them updated with progress with Evesham too. This opens up a second line of 'attack' with Evesham. 3. Write a letter (sending the letter Recorded Delivery) to Evesham outlining all the facts, dates, problems etc and also setting out my aims and my timescale for resolution. (One of the letters in the Template Library could easily be adapted for this.) 4. Stick to my timetable and, if necessary, be prepared to take the necessary court action under the Sale of Goods Act.

......not forgetting, of course, to add any further addresses they might have known you at.