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

Debt collection hell, need advice & someone to talk to...


Peepo
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5571 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

I see P1 watching, whom I respect greatly!!! :cool:

 

Any comments P1 ?

 

Sorry Dave.... must have missed your post last night.

 

Agree with everything you've said by the way. When a creditor or a DCA starts to demand money with menaces, or increased payments with menaces.... hogs your 'phone line, speaks to you like poo on a shoe, etc.... lol, then people owe it to themselves to protect their own backs. If that means throwing a debt into dispute with a CCA request to the orignal creditor, then so be it.

 

I have challenged 2 such creditors in this way... was quite happy to make token payments for years based on what I could genuinely afford, but saw red when they rang up with supposed powers of God Almighty himself... lol... and started issuing threats.

 

I don't do bullying... and no-one else on here should put up with it either.

 

Have a great respect for you too DMD !!.... ;)

 

:)

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Replies 127
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Yay !! Fantastic.... file it away forever !! :D

 

They shouldn't be adding defaults, no.... you might want to tackle this one after the festive period though. Let yourself enjoy the much-needed breathing space first.

 

Note how their letter is a bit "yeah but, no but" in places.... lol.

 

Well done !! ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 months later...
  • 4 months later...
Ahh ok thanks, I dont think they will be able to help me.

 

I recieved a reply for a Subject Access Request that I send one of my credit cards. They have sent me a copy of the credit agreement unsigned & have written

 

'We regard this as meeting our obligation under section 78 of the act 1974 to provide you with a true copy of the executed agreement. On their proper construction, that section and Regulation 3 of the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices & Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 (1983 S.I 1553) do not require us to provide you with a copy of the executed credit agreement between us in the form of a photocopy of that document'

 

Does this sound like a load of mumbojumbo?

 

They've supplied a copy under the above Act... but unfortunately it's unenforceable under CCA1974; sec 127(3), due to it being blank; no signatures. :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...