Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Advice needed please


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6031 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hello all

 

I could really do with some advice if any one can help.

 

I had issued proceedings against my bank, and my claim was due to be heard at the beginning of September. I then received a letter from Cobbetts which stated that they were applying to the Court for an order to stay my claim pending the outcome of the OFT enquiry, and subsequently a letter from the Court duly arrived informing me that the claim had been stayed.

 

I noted that in their letter, Cobbetts had pledged “as a general matter, the Bank will ensure that (my) claim would not be adversely affected by any stay of (my) Court proceedings”. Funny that. Perhaps this was some use of the term ‘adversely’ which I had not come across before.

 

I thought that the fact that NatWest were still adding around 50 quid a month in interest and charges to my overdraft (which comprises around half of the total sum I am claiming back) could potentially affect me very adversely, in fact to the tune of about £300-£400 if, when the test case is eventually decided, it goes in their favour.

 

I wrote to the Court and pointed out the unfairness of the fact that the bank were still trying to screw money out of me while my hands were effectively being tied.

 

I then received a letter from the Court informing me that the case would now be heard.

 

The letter also said: QUOTE

 

“Upon the Court’s own motion. The Court has made this order of it’s own initiative without a hearing. If you object to the order you must make an application to have it set aside, varied or stayed within 7 days of receiving it.

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT

 

1. Both sides must file a skeleton argument and copies of all relevant authorities relied on not later than 7 days before the hearing.

 

2. This application will be heard with a number of other similar applications at a composite hearing.

 

END QUOTE

 

Well I haven’t heard from Cobbetts so they can’t now apply for another stay.

 

I really need to know how to go about this, particularly with reference to the “copies of all relevant authorities relied on” bit.

 

Would the following paragraphs (cut and pasted from this site) constitute a skeleton argument?:

 

The law of penalty charges permits the recovery only of losses caused by a contractual breach.

 

Penalties which make profits are unenforceable at Common law and The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts regulations 1999

 

Could any one explain exactly what is required with reference to “copies of all relevant authorities relied on”

 

Any advice would be gratefully received.

 

Cheers

 

H

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1. Both sides must file a skeleton argument and copies of all relevant authorities relied on not later than 7 days before the hearing.

Not heard this used in connection with a stay hearing before but I suppose as these hearings become more commonplace there is no reason why not

 

 

I would phone the court to check exactly what your Judge is expecting if your not sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Zoot has put this wonderful document together

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/cases-stayed-pending-oft/114542-bundle-stay-hearings.html

 

get all of your stay reasons together and edit the basic bundle so you can send one to the court one the the banks solicitor and keep the original for yourself.

 

you have no directions on sending this so I would aim to get it submitted about 14 days before your court date.

 

It should also clarify the arguments in your mind so you will be ready to state your case in court :).

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

oh dear doesn't look good! I don't really have anything to bring to the attention of the Court other than the general point about the unfairness of the situation and the sentence in the Cobbett letter about then not adversely affecting my claim by applying for the stay. I'm wondering if I should perhaps throw in the towel and wait for the outcome of the OFT case...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...