Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • An update! I emailed both Andrzej.Tuleja and James_Goldsmith at Whirlpool dot com. I got a phone call from their executive team a couple of days later, and a replacement part dropped on the mat a week after. She was quite apologetic, however, also reiterated the "90 day warranty" period on customer fitted parts, and did not comment when I mentioned that the CRA also applies as I was a consumer buying from them directly. So I now have a spare door switch if the machine decides to eat another in the future! Cheers all!   Note dx100 that the "Hotpoint CEO" you linked to is not related to the hotpoint appliances, but some kind of marketing app.
    • yep, throw that morality card out the window....9/10 you never owe a DCA ANYTHING!! they are NOT BAILIFFS!!
    • (See the link to DVLA’s INF188/6 document I posted above, page 4 as cited) “I have a new medical condition that I have told the DVLA about on my recent application. Can I drive? As soon as the DVLA receives your correct and complete application for a new licence and as long as you meet all the Section 88 criteria, you may drive. It is important that you are satisfied that the medical condition you have declared on your application does not stop you from driving. If you are unsure, check with your doctor or healthcare professional before you make a decision. You can also look up your condition in the ‘Assessing fitness to drive’ guide, which you can find at www.gov.uk/dvla/fitnesstodrive to see whether you meet the medical standards for driving. As this guide is intended for healthcare professionals, it can be complicated. Your doctor or healthcare professional should be able to help you if necessary." It seems that DVLA think that S.88 does apply for applications disclosing a new medical condition after all. Why might this be so, and what of “qualifying application" and "relevant disability"? S. 92(1) imposes on the driver a requirement to disclose a relevant disability. S.92(3) requires the Secretary of State to refuse such an application disclosing a relevant disability ….. EXCEPT S.92(4) requires the Secretary of State to grant such an application if the relevant disability is “adequately controlled”. Hence my belief S.88 can apply for medical conditions (if the driver meets the medical standard of fitness to drive) as the application remains a qualifying application IF the driver meets the medical standard of fitness to drive, until DVLA (on behalf of the Secretary of State) say it doesn’t, provided the driver believes they meet the (medical) standard. Additionally, at (or before) June 2013 (as noted in my previous post) the medical standard for fitness to drive for conditions involving excessive daytime sleepiness was changed from “completely controlled” to "adequately controlled".  
    • CFO Bill Guan allegedly led a team at the news outlet that was behind a global money laundering scheme.View the full article
    • Anyway, I've asked my Booking.com flat-rent-out-bloke what needs to be done on the Booking.com portal to cancel a reservation. I got a late message "I'll let you know tomorrow".
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 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
      • 161 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
  • Recommended Topics

SUCCESS TODAY RBS pays up.


Douglas52
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6088 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

Proof due in Aberdeen this week

RBS gave in today!!! Usual e-mail- as follows quote

 

As you are aware, a Proof has been set for Friday, 5 October in this

> matter. The Bank is of the view that its charges are fair, reasonable and

> transparent and that the amounts debited to your account have been applied

> in accordance with your agreement with its terms and in compliance with

> all applicable laws and regulations. As such, the Bank does not accept

> that it has any liability to you in law or that your claim has any

> prospects of succeeding in court.

>

> As a goodwill gesture, and in settlement of your action, the Bank has

> offered to pay you the full amount of charges you are seeking, amounting

> to £180. The offer also included £39 to refund your expenses in bringing

> the action, and interest from the date of citation of the court

> proceedings. You have not accepted this offer on the basis that you are

> seeking interest from an earlier date.

>

> The Bank is of the view that on a commercial basis, it would not be

> efficient to go to court over the matter of interest as the difference

> between the monetary amount the Bank has previously offered you in

> settlement of your action and the amount you are still seeking would not

> make going to court a cost-effective option.

>

> As a gesture of goodwill and without admission of liability, the Bank is

> now willing to pay you the total sum of £272.10 in settlement of your

> court action. This sum consists of £180 in respect of the charges applied

> to your account, £53.10 in respect of interest from the date each charge

> was applied to your account to Friday, 21 September when the cheque was

> drawn up and £39 refunding your expenses in bringing the action.

Unquote.

 

 

KEEP GOING EVERYONE BE PERSISTENT!!!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

written entirely without prejudice to my whole rights and pleas in law and may not be founded upon in any proceedings.:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

CONGRATULATIONS !

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic news Douglas!

 

CONGRATULATIONS!!!!

Can't find what you're looking for? Please have a look at Michael Browne's

A-Z Guide

*** PLEASE NOTE ***

I do not answer queries via PM. If you send me a PM, please include a link to your thread - any advice I am able to offer will be on your thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice work.

 

Was this sent by the Bank themselves or their litigation team ?

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That was sent by a trainee solicitor in their Group Litigation team. I suspect they may use trainees because they may have a different status from qualified solicitors wrt the law society rules!!! In any event I intend to complain to the Law Society about their conduct. I will post the complaint and replies.

written entirely without prejudice to my whole rights and pleas in law and may not be founded upon in any proceedings.:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done Douglas :D

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...