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
      • 162 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

accident claim - advice please! help!


mcvey123

Recommended Posts

Hi there,

just checking what people think!

 

We run a basic cleaning firm where we clean people's houses. yesterday, when one of the cleaners went to do a house clean, (where the people supply the cleaning materials) the man who owns the house slipped on the floors. Now, firstly the floors were damp and drying and he was told to be careful. Secondly, it transpires that the floor cleaner supplied was polish not "pledge wooden floor cleaner" and so the floors were slippy. The cleaner went back and redid the floors as soon as we all realised what had happened.

 

do you think the customer has grounds for claiming as he suppplied the floor cleaner and was told to stay off the wet floors?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Id suggest it was contributory negligence on both sides. The householder may have supplied the products, but there would have been a duty of care that the cleaner should have realised the floor treatment was going to be problematic. Also against you is that despite this arrangement, the householder could argue that the polish was never meant to be used on the floor - just his grand piano - and had not realised the pledge wooden floor cleaner was empty. Hopefully, a common-sense solution will prevail. Why not offer (without liability) to do the house free for a month as a gesture of goodwill? If it looks like getting nasty, a solicitor is a must.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope it don't come to anything Mc and I think Buzby's idea is a great one and the cost would be negliable.

Just to bring to your attention. A few years ago a woman slipped on an commercial building floor that had been washed and there were signs around saying take care slippery floor, won her case for compensation as the judge said that putting those signs out was an admittance that the floor was dangerous.

You can't win can you and don't know what to do for the best.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did he injure himself when he slipped?

For most claims regarding health + safety you need to have Negligence, Loss and a link between the too. Dependent on the amount of warning given to the client, the injury occurred and whether that injury prevented him from doing anything else would weigh heavily on any claim against you.

Ex-Retail Manager who is happy to offer helpful advise in many consumer problems based on my retail experience. Any advise I do offer is my opinion and how I understand the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Slips, Trips and Falls the most common accident off the roads.

Ex-Retail Manager who is happy to offer helpful advise in many consumer problems based on my retail experience. Any advise I do offer is my opinion and how I understand the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem these days is that many insurance companies will pay out when really they should fight the case. I have several clients who have been faced with increased premiums because staff have injured themselves (most of the time through their own negligence) but instead of investigating and fighting it the insurers just pay up and charge everyone who has public liability insurance.

BANK CHARGES

Nat West Bus Acct £1750 reclaim - WON

 

LTSB Bus Acct £1650 charges w/o against o/s balance - WON

 

Halifax Pers Acct £1650 charges taken from benefits - WON

 

Others

 

GE Money sec loan - £1900 in charges - settlement agreed

GE Money sec loan - ERC of £2.5K valid for 15 years - on standby

FirstPlus - missold PPI of £20K for friends - WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...