Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Sainsbury's Bank - Failure to comply with order for specific disclosure


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6033 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,

 

I managed to get the District Judge to make an order for specific disclosure against Sainsbury's Bank plc when I had my hearing recently (I summarised the events in this thread)

 

My case was in two parts: (1) repayment of unlawful credit card charges and; (2) removal of default notice. My argument was the standard line that charges led to the default, yadda yadda.

 

The terms of the disclosure order were thus:

 

'IT IS ORDERED THAT

 

1. The defendant is to file and serve by 4pm on 7th November 2007 a further witness statement exhibiting any internal guidance and any industry-wide agreement as to when and in what circumstances a default notice is registered. The statement must also explain in detail why the defendant issued the default notice in April 2006 and not earlier.'.

 

[This was basically to prove my point that my default was issued for being a long way over my limit, due to charges, rather than being persistently late with payments]

 

[2] Save as aforesaid, the claim is adjourned generally with permission to restore and if not restored by 10th April 2008, it will be Struck Out.

 

ENDS

 

Needless to say, Sainsbury's have not complied.

 

What are my options here? Are there any sanctions for failing to comply with an order of this kind?

 

Thanks,

 

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

No ideas then?

 

I've sent Sainsbury's lawyers a letter telling them that they are in breach of the order and given them 7 days to give me the information.

 

If they don't come up with the goods I am going to apply to the court to have their statement of case struck out. Is this the right course of action, do you think?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...