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

Putting the record straight


Guest perky88
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6051 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

This thread was linked to on pepipoo hence all the trolls joining just to disrupt the forum and attack its members.

 

 

So pepipoo members are trolls are they? I actually believe they offer some sound advice on that board, I have also read some very sound advice on this board, equally, there has been some poor advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 233
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm sorry but that is just not the case. On pepipoo hundreds, if not thousands of people, have been helped to defend themselves against unjust parking tickets, whether council or PPC issued. The level of analysis is outstanding IMHO. If however you have no grounds to challenge nobody will waste your time or money doing so.

 

This place on the other hand, although I have only been around for a day, appears to be populated with people who like to argue the toss but provide no real help, as well as representatives of the private parking companies and their associates who lurk around and try to put people off challenging tickets. When that happens on pepipoo they are quickly seen off so that those looking for help will receive it.

 

I thought this was a consumer rights forum but it appears I was misled, sadly. One good aspect of this is that I am sure some pepipooers will stick around here to balance up the debate and that can only be a oggd thing.

 

IM WITH YOU LEGALADVISER.im going know where till i let everyone know

Link to post
Share on other sites

What question?

 

How can a signage that is not seen, or even seen create an acceptance, while Felthouse v. Bindley clearly states that any acceptance must be clearly communicated. What legal authority overruled Felthouse v. Bindley? Or, if not, why does it not apply to PPCs?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but that is just not the case. On pepipoo hundreds, if not thousands of people, have been helped to defend themselves against unjust parking tickets, whether council or PPC issued. The level of analysis is outstanding IMHO. If however you have no grounds to challenge nobody will waste your time or money doing so.

 

This place on the other hand, although I have only been around for a day, appears to be populated with people who like to argue the toss but provide no real help, as well as representatives of the private parking companies and their associates who lurk around and try to put people off challenging tickets. When that happens on pepipoo they are quickly seen off so that those looking for help will receive it.

 

I thought this was a consumer rights forum but it appears I was misled, sadly. One good aspect of this is that I am sure some pepipooers will stick around here to balance up the debate and that can only be a good thing.

 

Hear hear!

Link to post
Share on other sites

How can a signage that is not seen, or even seen create an acceptance, while Felthouse v. Bindley clearly states that any acceptance must be clearly communicated. What legal authority overruled Felthouse v. Bindley? Or, if not, why does it not apply to PPCs?

 

 

I have not got a clue what you are on about or care for that matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but that is just not the case. On pepipoo hundreds, if not thousands of people, have been helped to defend themselves against unjust parking tickets, whether council or PPC issued. The level of analysis is outstanding IMHO. If however you have no grounds to challenge nobody will waste your time or money doing so.

 

This place on the other hand, although I have only been around for a day, appears to be populated with people who like to argue the toss but provide no real help, as well as representatives of the private parking companies and their associates who lurk around and try to put people off challenging tickets. When that happens on pepipoo they are quickly seen off so that those looking for help will receive it.

 

I thought this was a consumer rights forum but it appears I was misled, sadly. One good aspect of this is that I am sure some pepipooers will stick around here to balance up the debate and that can only be a good thing.

 

Hear hear!

Link to post
Share on other sites

oops he stumped.should have checked out pepipoo.or sorry we are all trolls.what a laugh.who needs help now then?

 

If you are going to try and insult me at least try and get a grasp of the English language and punctuation!

I don't care because I never said there was a contract. I don't even drive a car so there is little point in me losing sleep over it is there?

You have added nothing constructive to this debate other than call someone a fat pig and make an untrue statement that parking fines are covered by criminal law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

excuse me but fpn.s parking fines are covered by law.ie mag courts.invoices are not.you cant take me to mag court over an invioce now can you.or am i stupid.please correct me if im wrong.and if you dont drive then why are you looking at this thread? PPC.I THINK

Link to post
Share on other sites

excuse me but fpn.s parking fines are covered by law.ie mag courts.invoices are not.you cant take me to mag court over an invioce now can you.or am i stupid.please correct me if im wrong.and if you dont drive then why are you looking at this thread? PPC.I THINK

 

well you think wrong.i didnt say i didnt drive or cant you read as well as write?no you cant take an invoice to magistrate court so that kind of ruins your theory about being guilty or cant you remember your own stupid remarks?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kindly substitute the word "Guilty" for "liable" and "innocent" for "otherwise"

then we can all go back to being mates.

 

Parking fines are covered by criminal law when issued by a police officer, a traffic warden or a PCSO, referring to a Penalty charge under contract as a fine is also covered by criminal law. btw

All posts by myself are without prejudice and do not constitue legal advice, they are purely for the discussion of points of law and consumer rights.

I am however not affiliated in any way shape or form with any financial institution or parking company. And if i am elected I will make it mandatory that all persons posting on this forum make such a declaration just so we can all see who the trolls are :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kindly substitute the word "Guilty" for "liable" and "innocent" for "otherwise"

then we can all go back to being mates.

 

Parking fines are covered by criminal law when issued by a police officer, a traffic warden or a PCSO, referring to a Penalty charge under contract as a fine is also covered by criminal law. btw

 

thanks for putting me right.cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6051 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...