Hi - Recently I refurbished my concrete garage floor. Scrubbed and acid-etched it, applied epoxy primer and 4 coats of epoxy paint for a lovely deep colour. Then finally applied a transparent protective topcoat, which went horribly wrong. The topcoat was supposed to be "smooth satin finish with excellent flow”, but it was actually quite viscous and didn't flow or settle well. Even worse, it didn't dry transparent, but with a cloudy white effect - the floor looks like a glazed doughnut. All materials were highest quality major brand and all bought retail on-line from same UK supplier (nearly £400). I am now in discussion with the supplier about this, and working through the predictable excuses ("you can't have mixed it properly", "no-one else has complained" etc). I am absolutely confident that it was correctly mixed and applied, using scrupulously clean tools etc. I had successfully applied 5 previous coats, this wasn't my first rodeo. The topcoat has set hard, and can't be removed. My only option is to paint over it all again, and this will probably need two coats of epoxy paint to reinstate the deep, rich colour. The materials for that will be around £100. I am hoping that the supplier will provide this additional paint without charge, and if so I'm happy to settle. If they won't offer a reasonable solution, then I will buy the necessary paint from another supplier and pursue it through the small claims procedure). What I'm not sure about is the basis for the court claim, should that be necessary. The supplied topcoat was materially defective, but I can't realistically return it for a refund because it's stuck to the floor. Also a simple refund of one can of topcoat sealant would only be about £40, leaving me well out of pocket. So I think this is maybe a "consequential damages" situation, or a tort? Would I pursue that in the ordinary way by reference to Consumer Rights Act 2015, or is a different model of claim necessary? Grateful for any advice, and especially for links to relevant information. Thanks

Just a thought. When you look at the new threads on CAG everyday, these appear to be the top 3 topics 1) Parking penalties 2) Court claims from DCA's 3) General debt issues In regard to parking penalties, these seem to dominate the new threads everyday and this is probably of no surprise. I just wondered whether it might be useful for CAG to have a monthly top 3 issues raised list. There could then be a focus on these. Perhaps a discussion thread started about how CAG could help e.g. Proactive guide for drivers/car owners to avoid these penalties, what evidence people should gather to help defend actions and the rules that apply etc. There are a number of 'experts' who reply to threads and very useful information is provided, but is then hidden in the threads. Perhaps a sticky discussion thread to main topic areas can be used to capture some of the most useful and latest advice. People would still be encouraged to start new threads for their specific cases.

If you purchased for instance vehicle prior to the above act being implement and the vehicle required a repair after the Act came into force i.e. December 2015 and the workmanship on the repair was very poor and the fault is still there, are you entitled to request a full refund of the repair within 30 day as it is a new purchase?

If you purchase an item and you have issues with it within the first 14 days and opt for a repair and then the same item breaks down again with the identical faults 4 months later are you as the consumer entitled to request a full refund as it has already had a repair for same faults? Which.co.uk seems to confirm that a full refund should be forthcoming. If yes, can someone point me to the actual legislation? Thanks.

Long story short. Around April last year I bought a guest bed for the spare room. The bed has only been used about 10 times as it's a guest bed, however the frame has broken and is fairly unusable as a bed. I've contacted Halifax to raise a S75 claim, however they are saying as I do not have the receipt to prove I purchased the bed, I am unable to make the claim, even though I have provided them with a statement showing the purchase. The bed cost £199. The store I bought the bed from went out of business late last year, so I have been unable to contact them. Do I need the original receipt to make a claim?

Avoid parcel2go Ltd terrible company, paid for next day delivery service, took 20 days to delivery. If you try and leave a review on Trust Pilot they report it, even though I have proof. Having to take legal action against them now, already gone to my bank to start chargeback, and starting court case http://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk If anyone else is having same problem, and interested in class action, please let me know.

If anyone can help with my next step I would be very grateful! I bought a Toshiba laptop online (not by credit card), I had it repaired under warranty just as the manufacturer warranty was ending - one year warranty. Toshiba use another company to outsource their warranty repair work. the warranty repair company returned the laptop to me with a new fault. I sent it back and they replaced a motherboard. The new fault came back again after a few weeks. I complained to Toshiba - zero response back from them. I returned the laptop to the repair company - and now they say it needs an entirely different part to fix the exact same fault as before and is no longer under warranty so want to charge £££. so far they are ignoring the evidence I have provided that backs up my claim of it being their responsibility to repair as its a fault introduced whilst they were repairing it and theyve supposedly already fixed it. But now I believe I'm approaching the small claims court stage. But is Toshiba liable as its their machine? Or is it the company I bought the laptop from as my contract is with them? Or, do I issue my claim with the repairing agent directly as they are now holding my laptop to ransom and demanding I pay them to either repair/return or dispose of my laptop. Thanks for any help or suggestions!

Dear Forum members, I’m new here, so please be gentle. I need some help/advice re dealings with a large bathroom supply company. They prepared some drawings for me and my wife for several bathrooms we needed. They were having a sale, and the salesperson said that if I put down some money, they would hold their sale prices for us after the sale. I put down £3000.00 on my credit card as a goodwill gesture and to secure the offer she had made. Later she gave us a quotation with a list of products they hoped I’d buy from them. My wife told the salesperson that she didn’t particularly like the selection of products made for us, and we would look into alternatives. She went to work on it and decided the drawings prepared weren’t to our taste and we went back to her own drawings done before we visited said company. The selections of products likewise, we could get better prices anyway from other local suppliers and on the internet. We had made no orders or purchases, or agreed any items. The salesperson wrote several emails asking for a deposit which we didn’t respond to as there was nothing on the quotation we wanted to order. My wife informed the salesperson we were changing the designs. There was no good reason to stick with this company for designs or product supply, so I notified the salesperson I would like my money refunded. The salesperson refused and said that on the back of their quotation were Terms and Conditions and they weren’t going to refund my money (I understand from this that they consider that I was/am in a contract with them). This was the first I had noticed of their T&Cs, and they had not been pointed out to me/us or even referred to in the meetings - but I hadn’t placed any order anyway, nor have I signed anything. Their T&Cs state that “no order submitted by the buyer shall be deemed to be accepted by the seller unless and until confirmed in writing by the seller”. The T&Cs also state: “Quotations are subject to withdrawal at any time before receipt of an unqualified order and shall be deemed to be withdrawn unless accepted within 30 days of their date”. The quote was in July 2016 and I still haven’t accepted it or ordered anything from the quote, or from the company. Further: "The Buyer may not cancel the Contract without the consent of the Seller which, if given, shall be deemed to be on the express condition that the buyer shall pay the seller for all reasonable loss, damage, claims or actions arising out of such cancellation unless otherwise agreed in writing”. Have I unwittingly entered in to a Contract without accepting the quotation, without having ordered any goods, without having signed anything and without having been shown the T&Cs (although they were printed on the back of the quotation)? Am I in a position to get my money back from them, or will I have to order goods to the value of the £3000.00 I am in credit with them? Am I under any legal obligations under these T&Cs or under any other consumer legislation?

I have just seen a RBS agreement from 1992!! At the top it does'nt have the usual bumf of 'this is a Credit agreement regulated under the consumer credit Act 1974' (or similar) I thought this was a must! What legal implications does it have? There are other faults but I can't remember what not having the above means. Its not mine so I can't post it up. Kind Regards jack

The Consumer Rights Act (CRA) will apply in full to all transport services, including mainline rail passenger services, from next month, allowing passengers to challenge the amount of compensation they are offered by rail companies. From the start of next month, under the Consumer Rights Act, passengers will be able to ask for their money back by going to a local county court if they are not happy with the way a rail operator has dealt with their request for compensation. Long-suffering commuters will also be allowed to demand that compensation is paid in cash rather than train vouchers. Under existing guidelines most train operators only offer a ‘delay repay’ deal which allows passengers to claim the cost of half a single journey for delays of more than half an hour – or the full one-way ticket price if held up for over an hour. It is only if a train is cancelled, or a vital connection missed, that a full refund of a return journey will be paid. These refunds are not automatic – you must fill in a form first – and they are currently paid in train journey vouchers. The new rules will allow passengers to demand all their money back if they believe the compensation offered is inadequate – or they believe they deserve a full refund as the service fell well short of what they had expected. Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-3783016/Delayed-leaves-line-train-company-court.html#ixzz4KtQ6t3ff

Hi guys. Here is an interesting one for you that I would appreciate any help in clarifying. In short, I purchased a buy-it-now item on Ebay. The seller is a business. Before I paid the seller contacted me to increase the cost of the postage (I do not live in Highlands or anywhere like that). I did not agree with this and when he followed up with a rude message, I chose to not proceed. So, I messaged the seller and politely told them I would not proceed and requested they simply cancel the sale. They refused. They then re-listed the item immediately AND subsequently opened a non-paying bidder case. Now this is where I would like clarification. Unless I am mistaken, the Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013 allows me to cancel within 14 days following the day of delivery. There is no beginning point, just an end point - 14 days following the day of delivery. So I could cancel now, tomorrow or any point up to that end point. I chose to cancel immediately as said. There was no payment made and thus the item was never sent. Again, unless I am mistaken it is an offence for a business to attempt to discourage a consumer from cancelling. Indeed I successfully sued Plusnet last year when they tried just that. And this is where it gets interesting - Ebay happily open the unpaid case, which by definition puts me under pressure to pay even though I do not want to proceed. Do not worry, I will not pay but some would. So, can anyone please confirm if Ebay business sellers are exempt from the CCRs (I don't expect for a moment that they are) or if Ebay are technically aiding and abetting breaking the law by allowing business sellers to try to talk consumers out of cancelling by threatening detrimental action on their buying accounts if they do not pay. Whilst Ebay do think they are a law unto themselves, business sellers in the UK must comply with CCRs and do not have exemption when using Ebay. Unless you know otherwise? Many thanks Rob

Morning all really need help dealing a debt collection company. My husband signed me up to a gym without my knowledge. Payments where not made and suddenly i have this debt collection company after me. I have emailed them back demanding a signed credit agreement, which they can not provide. I have told them i do not accept the debt because i did not give permission for the gym membership to be taken out in my name. I have tried emailing them and dealing with it but they wont listen. Really need some help on this This was the last email from them: Further to your letter dated 26th August 2016, as previously advised there is clear legal precedent for a legally binding contract to exist without a physical signature. Your attendance of the club (or lack thereof) is entirely irrelevant, as the membership exists whether you attend or not and the membership is the service for which payments are due, and you could attend at any time if you so wished. Similarly payment is required for subscription television services even when you don't watch, and payments remain due for a mobile phone contract when you make no calls or send any messages, etc. because in both instances the services is still being provided (programs are still broadcast and the mobile network still exists) and you could access these services at any time if you wished. Your gym membership is no different. As advised the email of confirmation was sent to (this email address) on 20th January 2016. Whether you have seen that email or not it was sent and as such you have been supplied with the information required by the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 in a durable form. This email was sent from email . Snap DDA is a trading style of Harlands Services Ltd and so we can see clearly that this email was sent. With regards to your query "how has exercise less allowed a credit and contract agreement to be taken out in [your] name without [your] permission or knowledge or signature." We advise simply that they have not for the following two reasons. Initially, this debt relates to an agreement that we are confident to be legally binding but at no point has any party claimed it to be a Credit Agreement. To be clear there is no provision of credit, no report has been made to any credit reference agency and neither Xercise 4 Less nor Harlands Services Ltd are regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Secondly, our client maintains that this agreement has been created at your request and thus was with your knowledge and consent. We would be interested to know your thoughts on where you suppose our client obtained your name, date of birth, postal address, email address and telephone number if you had not willingly supplied them to our client? We acknowledge your dispute, but since you have presented no new information to us, and since we have already responded to these points, we do not recognise that dispute as valid. Our position remains as previously advised. If you are not willing to set up a payment plan with us, we have no alternative but to proceed with further action against you. We will hold this for a further 7 days. If you advise us again that you do not intend to pay, we will continue our collection procedure, but will not continue to enter into further correspondence as our decision has been made. Payment can be made by Credit/Debit card by calling us on 01444 449165. Alternatively, cheque/postal orders should be made payable to Credit Resolution Services and sent to CRS, 2nd Floor, Rockwood House, 9-17 Perrymount Road, Haywards Heath, West Sussex, RH16 3TW. A payment plan can also be set up if you are unable to settle in full, although we do charge a little extra for this. If you are experiencing financial difficulty, there are organisations who offer free debt advice and assistance such as Step Change (0800 1381111), National Debtline (0808 8084000) and your local Citizen Advice Bureau. Please ensure a payment or response is received within the next 7 days, so we can avoid further action being taken. Yours sincerely,

I bought my son a Direct Bike and at £499 + costs which I expected. Whilst I was some what suspicious about the product given some of the things I had read on the internet I felt there was a lot of price gap between the nearest new product and Direct Bikes should anything go wrong. I have to say the product which arrived was well crated and arrived in the time interval give and even though getting insurance and sorting Registration was a little problematic it got sorted and my son is extremely happy with the bike. My issue is with their after sale or lack of after sales and I have experienced exactly what other have. Stone walling and its all my fault. As a motorcycle fanatic for forty years I've been repairing, restoring and servicing my own bikes for years and as my son is now doing vehicle maintenance at college, we have undertaken servicing to the bike at the recommended periods. However the automatic clutch has failed at 3months old or 1300 miles and I feel this is unacceptable. I have had communications with the company, so at the risk of being sued by the company here is the communications I had with them which is in contravention to their rider which says: This email and any files included with it may contain proprietary and/or confidential information that is privileged and confidential and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any disclosure, copying, distribution, posting, or use of the information contained in or attached to this email is prohibited unless permitted by the sender. I'm hoping they do, as this will get this matter to court. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Q)The DB50QT-11 we purchase for or son has an automatic clutch issue could you pls supply me with an approved dealer within our area. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ R)Thank you for your email. Please see information on your local approved service centres: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Q)Thank you for your response. I have considered the two companies suggested but both are very busy with work . I have therefore been to a Garage near to my works. They have looked at the clutch issue and tell me the belt drive on the back of the clutch has separated with the furthest rear belt plate becoming detached from the clutch unit and needs replacing. Whilst not uncommon he suggested it is normally the inside belt plate which normally detaches. Since the bike is only three months old with approx. 1300 miles on the clock I would like to make a claim under the guarantee for the replacement parts to repair this fault. Since I am not aware of the structure of the clutch assembly due to lack of a work shop manual I do not know exactly what parts for the clutch assembley are needed, but it will need a new clutch housing gasket I would be grateful of further details regarding making a guarantee claim ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- R)Thank you for your email. Has your bike been serviced? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Q)Yes . Using P22 and 23 of your customer manual. The inspection and replacements were done at both 3mths and 6mth mileage intervals by myself and my son because he is undertaking a vehicle maintenance course at college and he wanted the evidence with photos for his portfolio. However, some of the things you have on your inspection list need updating as they simply do not exist on this bike. The only reason for having the garage do the work now is I do not have compression tools often required when rebuilding clutches, and without the ram-air socket its too easy to damage parts. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- R)You have confirmed that the scooter has travelled 1300 km with out two services carried out by yourself. The scooter is substantially overdue for its first service. For the continued use and safety of your scooter it is essential that your scooter is serviced which ever is sooner at 300kms/3 months - 1000km/6 months 3000kms/12 months and every 3000kms / 6 months subsequently by an approved service centre. This is clearly stated within the terms and conditions of sale. By way of example: 3.3. The Buyer acknowledges that the Goods are provided with the requirement to attach the wing mirrors, battery and any free accessories by the Buyer and all nuts and bolts need to be checked before road use. The Buyer acknowledges that the goods are not to be driven over 20mph for the first 100 miles of use. The Buyer acknowledges that the goods are supplied for public highway road use. The Buyer acknowledges that the Goods need to be registered with the DVLA and that the DVLA may wish to inspect and request the Goods to be tested and that the Seller does not cover any associated costs. The Buyer acknowledges that for continued use and safety the Goods need to be regularly serviced at the service periods are due at either distance travelled or time period of ownership, which ever is sooner, (300km / 3 months of ownership for first service, 1000km / 6 months for second service, 3000km / 12 months for third service and every 3000kms / 6 months of ownership subsequently) & mai ntained by an approved service centre. In order to maintain high quality workmanship and sound mechanical practices you should only seek standard repairs and standard servicing in relation to the Goods from an Approved Service Centre with approved parts. At the regular service intervals the scooters components are inspected, cleaned, adjusted, lubricated, and/or changed. Under the circumstances we are unable to process a claim. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Q)I would suggest you please read my previous e-mail and your reply. I clearly state the two services were carried out by my son and I. But in your reply you tell me: “You have confirmed that the scooter has travelled 1300 km with out two services carried out by yourself.” This make no sense. However, now to the facts as you well know. No matter what services have been done on the scooter the part which has failed is a none serviceable part and therefore it is reasonable to expect you to replace, free of charge, the parts required without the need for a protracted disagreement over wordage etc. The parts amount to only around £30-£40 retail and much less than this for your company. The largest cost which is labour you are not standing. So I would be grateful for you to contact the garage where I have taken the scooter and organise with them to send replacement parts which should not have failed after such short usage. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- R) Our bikes are not for self service, they need to be serviced by an approved service centre. This is clearly stated in the terms and conditions of sale: By way of example: 3.3. The Buyer acknowledges that the Goods are provided with the requirement to attach the wing mirrors, battery and any free accessories by the Buyer and all nuts and bolts need to be checked before road use. The Buyer acknowledges that the goods are not to be driven over 20mph for the first 100 miles of use. The Buyer acknowledges that the goods are supplied for public highway road use. The Buyer acknowledges that the Goods need to be registered with the DVLA and that the DVLA may wish to inspect and request the Goods to be tested and that the Seller does not cover any associated costs. The Buyer acknowledges that for continued use and safety the Goods need to be regularly serviced at the service periods are due at either distance travelled or time period of ownership, which ever is sooner, (300km / 3 months of ownership for first service, 1000km / 6 months for second service, 3000km / 12 months for third service and every 3000kms / 6 months of ownership subsequently) & mai ntained by an approved service centre. In order to maintain high quality workmanship and sound mechanical practices you should only seek standard repairs and standard servicing in relation to the Goods from an Approved Service Centre with approved parts. The belt, clutch and associated components are part of the services that you have failed to adhered to. Under the circumstances we are unable to process a claim. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Q) Ok. The Sale of Goods Act 1979 says that any item you buy from a trader must be: of satisfactory quality fit for purpose match any description given. If it isn’t, you can usually get one of the following: a repair a replacement your money back (a refund) some of your money back. You will not have these rights if: there is nothing wrong with the goods – you have just changed your mind about wanting them you examined the goods, or a sample of the goods, when you were buying them, and the fault you want to complain about was so obvious that you should have noticed it the trader pointed out the defect that you now want to complain about you have damaged the goods yourself the problem is the result of normal wear and tear the goods have lasted for as long as could reasonably be expected. This means that you fail on two counts since under no condition of servicing is this part of the motorcycle inspected or attended to. In fact it is behind a sealed cover which is never removed as part of any routine servicing. Therefore the item has failed sooner than would be reasonably be expected and was therefore not of satisfactory quality or fit for purpose. As such we are entitled to a repair or a replacement and you are using some unreasonable demands written into you blurb to try and reduce your liability which I can show is not applicable in this case by providing you with written statements from say five different service centres who will agree that your literature is not applicable. If you still feel you are covered by your claus 3.3 then I will have no option but to pursue this matter through the small claims court and I’m sure that your tarnished reputation via Watchdog and trading standards in the past will do nothing but to support my claim. I real do not understand why you feel this very small claim is worth fighting unless of course it is put into the context of say lots of individuals having similar problems with substandard parts which you refuse to deal with hiding behind clause 3.3 saving you say: 1000 claims p.a x £20 = savings to the company of £20,000. I would ask you to reconsider my claim. Since given your initial response and anticipating your reaction, I have now purchased the parts required and the scooter is back on the road. Because of this I now request a cheque for £25 to cover the cost of getting the parts and the postage needed. I am more than happy to supply you with proof of the repair and proof of purchase of the parts required. All this said the scooter is really nice and a fantastic product for the price it’s just a shame you insist on such archaic aftersales service putting you company in such a poor light. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- R) Thank you for your email The sales of goods act 1979 does not cover misuse. You have misused the goods by not servicing the vehicle as required. The service requirements are clearly stated in the terms and conditions of sales that you have agreed to upon purchase. 3.3. The Buyer acknowledges that the Goods are provided with the requirement to attach the wing mirrors, battery and any free accessories by the Buyer and all nuts and bolts need to be checked before road use. The Buyer acknowledges that the goods are not to be driven over 20mph for the first 100 miles of use. The Buyer acknowledges that the goods are supplied for public highway road use. The Buyer acknowledges that the Goods need to be registered with the DVLA and that the DVLA / HMRC may incur a delay in registration or wish to inspect and request the Goods to be tested and that the Seller does not cover any associated costs. The Buyer acknowledges that for continued use and safety the Goods need to be regularly serviced at the service periods are due at either distance travelled or time period of ownership, which ever is sooner, (300km / 3 months of ownership for first service, 1000km / 6 months for second service, 3000km / 12 months for third service and every 3000kms / 6 months of ownership subsequently) & maintained by an approved service centre. In order to maintain high quality workmanship and sound mechanical practices you should only seek standard repairs and standard servicing in relation to the Goods from an Approved Service Centre with approved parts. Our vehicles are not to be self serviced. The terms and conditions clearly state that servicing is to carried out by an approved service centre It is not possible to purchase a vehicle without prior agreeing to the terms and conditions of sale. As advised prior the belt, clutch and associated components are part of the services that you have failed to adhered to. Under the circumstances we will not be able to process a claim and is our final position regarding this matter. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Further to your e-mail. I would like a plausible explanation as to how, by not inspecting the span clutch leaver which is the only reference to a clutch part in your service regime constitutes misuse when the scooter does not have a span clutch lever. Also, if the scooter had been to a motorcycle service centre they too would not have looked at or adjusted an part of the clutch assemble or parts that are not on the scooter. If non of the service items affect the clutch even indirectly how can this be categorised as misuse? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you for your email. You have confirmed that the scooter has travelled 1300 km with out two services carried out by yourself. The scooter is substantially overdue for its first service. For the continued use and safety of your scooter it is essential that your scooter is serviced which ever is sooner at 300kms/3 months - 1000km/6 months 3000kms/12 months and every 3000kms / 6 months subsequently by an approved service centre. This is clearly stated within the terms and conditions of sale. By way of example: 3.3. The Buyer acknowledges that the Goods are provided with the requirement to attach the wing mirrors, battery and any free accessories by the Buyer and all nuts and bolts need to be checked before road use. The Buyer acknowledges that the goods are not to be driven over 20mph for the first 100 miles of use. The Buyer acknowledges that the goods are supplied for public highway road use. The Buyer acknowledges that the Goods need to be registered with the DVLA and that the DVLA may wish to inspect and request the Goods to be tested and that the Seller does not cover any associated costs. The Buyer acknowledges that for continued use and safety the Goods need to be regularly serviced at the service periods are due at either distance travelled or time period of ownership, which ever is sooner, (300km / 3 months of ownership for first service, 1000km / 6 months for second service, 3000km / 12 months for third service and every 3000kms / 6 months of ownership subsequently) & mai ntained by an approved service centre. In order to maintain high quality workmanship and sound mechanical practices you should only seek standard repairs and standard servicing in relation to the Goods from an Approved Service Centre with approved parts. At the regular service intervals the scooters components are inspected, cleaned, adjusted, lubricated, and/or changed. Under the circumstances we are unable to process a claim. If you require parts, please see the link below: Please arrange your overdue service with your local approved service centre. We are the brand manufacturer of the scooter, as advised prior the belt, clutch and associated components are part of the services that you have failed to adhered to. We have already confirmed our final position and will engage in no further correspondence regarding this matter. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Well I'm sorry this is so long but it is as it is. I have sought legal advise but the cost of initial consultation etc, seem prohibitive given the small amounts involved maybe this is why they can get away with poor customer service?. I have passed this info on to trading standards and am awaiting a response so I suppose there is still hope yet. Might even give a copy to Watchdog. Maybe they will want to do another piece?? --------------------------------

A family member decided 10 months ago to replace his ageing car with a factory-ordered brand new one. He opted for a PCP deal having first undertaken extensive homework about total interest payable and likely future value etc. Of all the options open to him, the PCP deal together with further incentives he negotiated with the supplying dealership most suited his circumstances. Until recently, he had no cause for complaint. But then the symptoms of one or two faults (or a single inter-related fault) affecting engine and auto transmission became evident. The car has been into the supplying dealership which immediately sought the manufacturer's involvement. Some preliminary work was then undertaken according to the manufacturer's guidance, pending further work which will be carried out two months' hence at its first service. The car, which has one 9,000 miles from new, is said to be perfectly usable until the time of that service and that in any event, anything and everything is covered under the manufacturer's warranty. Fair enough. Except: delving into the Internet to research his car's emergent problems, he has discovered dozens (literally) of posts on motoring forums going back over several years, all of them complaining about the same problem(s) and about the hoops it was necessary to go through to get them fixed. In some cases, the manufacturer replaced the engine and transmission under warranty -- though only at the end of protracted arguments where some consumers were concerned. Also in some cases, the vehicle was off the road for up to a month while those repairs were completed. What isn't clear from any of those Internet posts is whether or not the posters had financed the purchase of the car outright from their own funds; whether it was with a bank loan; whether it was hire purchase; or whether it was a PCP. That actually strikes me as being of crucial importance. Currently, my relative's car is still showing symptoms of inherent faults, albeit those symptoms are now less noticeable than originally. He is resigned to living with them and to abide by the dealership's / manufacturer's guidance. However, he is worrying about what might happen if it turns out that the vehicle becomes unusable due to failure, or if he is ultimately told that it will be out of his possession for a lengthy period due to the possible scale of repairs required. The word 'possession' prompted me to post this query on here, because it seems to me that he doesn't 'possess' the vehicle in a strictly legal sense (i.e., of ownership), rather that he and the manufacturer entered into a contract -- brokered by the supplying dealership -- via which he pays a monthly premium to the manufacturer's finance company and the manufacturer in turn supplies a car fit for purpose and usage. Am I right in thinking that in the event of -- and I must stress: 'in the event of' -- the situation becoming worse and the vehicle failing to perform / being unavailable to him for short periods or an extended period, the essence of the issue here is as more about breach of contract than anything else? Advice appreciated; though things seem to be under control at the moment, it's surely as well to be fore-armed by being forewarned of a consumer's position when it comes to the PCP of a new car and what happens if that car develops problems early in its life. Thanks.

I was left with no option by my bank RBS but to submit a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman in my dispute with them. The dispute relates to Personal Guarantees for my former business which ceased trading last year and is now formally dissolved. The Adjudicator is claiming they can't consider the case as I am neither a 'consumer' as the finance is considered to have been 'acting for purposes within my trade, business, craft or profession.' nor a 'micro enterprise' as the business 'isn't capable of being represented and it can't raise a complaint'. They've used a court case BlueFin v Ombudsman to support their position with regards to my not being a consumer. So, despite having been a victim of extremely poor practice by RBS I am caught out by this Catch 22. Anyone had a similar experience or can provide any pointers on how I could challenge their response?

My brother received a notifications of a charge from UKCPM. Going back a few months he went on holiday, during this period he parked for considerably under the time he paid for in a UKCPM car park. He wrote to them flatly denying that any "offence" has occurred. They have now written back informing him that his "appeal" has been turned down. He says this wasn't an appeal. It was a complete and utter rejection of the notion that there was ever anything to appeal about. This is the enquiry that I am making on his behalf. He, being a charitable sort, thinks he may have entered the wrong registration number in their machine. They say that it was his responsibility to ensure that he enter the correct vehicle registration number in the machine. Is this true? Or does his responsibility begin and end with paying for the amount of time he was parked? ("parking charge" legality notwithstanding) Which he did. Amply. As I was writing this it occurred to me that they will know when he entered the car park, they will know when he left the car park, as they will have photographic evidence. They will thusly know how long he was there. They will know how much money was accrued on that day, via what numbers, and it would be a simple matter for them to check if this tallies with my brother's version of events. But- did he have to put the right number in or is this BS on their part? Just so as to know on next replying.

Need guidance: Purchased the following three days ago, from a store: http://www.pcworld.co.uk/gbuk/phones-broadband-and-sat-nav/broadband/mobile-broadband/ee-osprey-2-mini-pay-monthly-mobile-wifi-10132535-pdt.html Personal Hotspot Device - £9.99 + 30 day (rolling) data contract (I choose the 32gb tarrif - £28pm). At purchase - I had to put my debit card in the pay machine to pay twice - 1st - £9.99 for the device, 2nd - for the 30 day rolling data contract validation (£5). I've been using both for the last three days (The device box & the separate data sim were both sealed when we left the store). I opened and used both. I want to return and get a refund for the device + as much as possible for the contract. I have friends that have warned me 'not to trust this high street retailer - and to understand that they 'game' customers to avoid refunds as much as possible'. What are my consumer rights - and how should I approach this to get back as much as possible? My sincere thanks to any and all that help and contribute. Libertas

I have a CCJ hearing on Wednesday about an outsanding "finance gap" debt after repossession of a vehicle last year. Would be grateful to hear of relevant precedents/case law. I bought the vehicle under an HP scheme, transferring in a part-ex finance gap from a previous car. Payment problems after loss of business caused me to default and the vehicle was repossessed last October. Court date is Wednesday. My initial defence was that the price they gave for the auction figure cannot be sufficient, that it is unjust to take their word and they had produced no hard evidence of the auction price. The finance co's solicitors have since come back with documents justifying the auction price. I want to argue the 1/3 paid issue (repossession was without a court order and under some duress off private land and without my consent, so there may be other issues to argue as well) but there seem to be many views on what precisely constitutes the "1/3 paid". These are the figures: Original total price (April 09) £ 34,001 Part-ex in from previous vehicle £ 3,848 My initial deposit £ 7,500 Balance due (this was financed) £ 30,350 Charge for credit was £ 9,024 60 monthly payments of £ 650.15 Claimant's solicitor is arguing that I paid a deposit of only £ 3,651 as the remainder was to cover the previous finance gap from the part-ex vehicle. This is almost certainly false, as the documentation clearly shows me paying a deposit of £7,500 regardless of how it was used. Prior to repossession, I had repaid approx. £ 6,500 in installments. Therefore the total of my installments + initial deposit was roughly £ 13,500 which appears to be more than 1/3 of the total sale price. Would be grateful for any suggestions!

I have looked round for such a Site many times when looking over there for problems similar to we have in the UK.And maybe join such a group to chat to some of our American friends. Never seen it before,or missed it when looking, and the link does not work anyway. A test bed,it says. Now i am sure a wise one ,as i am not tech minded can tell me how long this was going,or perhaps going to happen perhaps. Just copied this to show you how i was baffled,it does not take much to achieve. This is what i am on about. Consumer Action Group - Americans Unite to Reclaim the Right Free help to assert consumer rights. ... Welcome to the Consumer Action Group of America · The Bear Garden · This forum - Questions and Answers. General ... And there was much more,huge in fact. Would sure need one hell of a Site Team . http://testbed.consumeractiongroup.com/archive/index.php

Hi, I was hoping someone could help me. Basically in April I bought a used car from a trader. The car broke down pretty much straight away and now wont start up at all. I had spoken to consumer direct who told me to write to the trader and tell them as I have had the car under 30 days I am rejecting the car and seeking a refund because the car was not fit for purpose and was not as described (the trader when I bought it said the car was perfectly ok with nothing wrong with it, it infact had a serious fault). The Trader who sold me it as a result of my letter has came around to my house today shouting and swearing and being abusive. He offered me a lesser car than the one I bought from him, valued at the same price on his website. But he was wanting me to pay him £300 more for it. And it would be classed as a private sale not trade so no comebacks if anything is wrong with this other car. Obviously I rejected this offer. He has told me to take him to small claims and all he will do is leave the country and so I won't get the car or the money, or if I do it will not be until a year has passed as he wont be in the UK for many months so I will be out of the car and no money for all this time that he deliberately messes me and the court about to drag this out as long as he can (I know this is an empty threat as the courts wont allow this to go on). But anyway. I am now in the situation I need to draft up my particulars of claim for a consumer rights 2015 claim on the basis that the car was both not fit for purpose. And not as described. I have looked over the Consumer Rights Act and I am not sure which sections of the Consumer Rights Act apply to used car purchases under the above two scenarios. Can anyone help and advise which sections of the consumer rights act I would bring my claim under. i.e section 22(4) or something like this. Thank you in advance.

The government is set to delay implementing enhanced rights for rail passengers by 18 months, Which? has discovered. Earlier this month, it emerged that the government is set to delay the implementation of the Consumer Rights Act in sea and air travel until October 2016. And now, Which? has discovered that rail will be delayed by a further 12 months until October 2017. The Consumer Rights Act came into force across most sectors in October 2015 and was initially due to apply to all travel sectors from 6 April 2016. This delay means consumers will now have to wait another 18 months to be able to claim a full refund or compensation when a train operator does not deliver a service 'with reasonable care and skill'. http://www.which.co.uk/news/2016/04/further-delays-in-store-for-rail-passenger-rights-439947/

Hello We received a product from a Scottish company (via Amazon) that did not fit the description. It was different in quality and appearance to the picture on the website. They have insisted that we pay considerable carriage to return the bulky goods (flooring). They are clearly in the wrong as far as distance selling and consumer law are concerned. The goods were not as described and therefore the onus is on them to collect and refund. My question: As it is not possible to use money claim online for a scottish defendant, how should i approach this? I don't see why I should use the scottish courts, as the supply was made to england and I want the case heard in my local court, which as a consumer I believe is my right? If the case is heard in scottland they know its not worth my while to proceed and I suspect the reverse is true. i.e. that they will not contest a case in person for £200 so far away. How can I use English courts and have it heard locally? Thanks

CAG Flyer A4 CAG Flyer A4.pdf CAG Flyer A5 CAG Flyer A5.pdf

Sorry I didn't do this yesterday, I assumed others would have remembered, then again, how many of the old guard are left? Well, as one of the olden golden 'uns, I want to wish to CAG a very happy, well done 10th birthday wish! Yes, dear readers, 10 years ago (and one day!), a very small with a small band of misfits and reprobates decided to take on the might of the banking industry, and it was called the Bank Action Group. A couple of months later, the idea came about that maybe, we could do more than just tackle the banks and that there were so many more injustices where the might of the people could challenge the status quo whereby the customer always ended up being wrong... and so the name was changed to Consumer Action Group. Well, 10 years on, here we are, still going, despite numerous efforts to bring the site down in many different ways. Even though I am no longer active on the boards, I will forever be very proud to have been part of the fight, to have helped taking the banks and other industries to task, and so, I hope you will all join me to wish CAG a very happy 10th birthday, and here's to the next 10!

Hi all, Been a while and I find myself on here hoping to get some advice I bought a nearly new Audi from a main dealership last month (15th) on finance (VWFS) I literally drove it from the dealership to the house and that was it until the next day where it "seemed" fine. The day after, I found myself having to email/book in the car for a number of rattles/squeaks - one of which was fairly obvious, another not so but loud enough to record it on the phone. It got seen to the following week and came back with the main noise fixed - the other could not be replicated. Soon as I left, the other one came back along with a few more such as suspension noise/squelch on their ramps etc. Turned back but it was shut so another email went over. I then called, no reply to both. I got busy but last week finally email again to find the service guy had left the company. I therefore sent an email to the sales guy + his manager outlining some 10 issues with the car - mainly rattles/squeaks This got sent to the service manager who in fairness has been very polite and has booked it in for this week. In the mean time, I have been just looking at the what if scenario - ie: if it comes back with similar/same/more faults. So what I proposed is to return the car, and I purchase another from their group that is around 4k more. Hopefully get some dealer contribution in, and I top it up with more deposit money to keep payments the same. This was rejected and was told that they could only buy the car back which would be around 8k less than the one I proposed to buy. So I guess my question is: 1. Do I let them fix and cross my fingers 2. Is there any way to use the Consumer Rights Act 2015 despite it now being past the 30 days (but initial issues reported within the 30 days) While most faults are not detrimental, I just feel the car might have been potentially abused in their possession as a ex-demo car and while I have 3 years warranty ... this could end up being in the dealership more than with me. Appreciate your thoughts