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

A true story based on facts regarding Barclaycard, Lowell, Hamptons and Red.


aesthetic13
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5954 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 think that in order to prove that this is not your debt, you need the police to act on the fraud, if there is proof that the police are looking into this, then the DCA should be informed and a simple phone call between the dca and the police should be enough to get them to wind their necks in.

 

If charges are brought by the police against your former partner, then that should be the end of the matter. the legal system far outweighs any powers a mere dca or creditor may think they have.

 

If the police say that your former partner was responsible for this debt and the courts concur with this, then you have absolute proof that the debt is not yours and as such there is no action any dca can take

Link to post
Share on other sites

I got divorced and found all sorts of stuff coming to my house, the police got involved and although they agreed the debt wasn't mine, they couldn't pin down the ex wife who was responsible.

 

The polices involvement however was enough to put off a number of the DCAs chasing me, but not all.

 

so be warned, whilst you may have right on your side, it doesn't mean the lowlifes will leave you in peace, or play the game fairly.

 

If you can keep in constant communications with the police and periodically send a letter to the DCA letting them know of any updates or changes, it will at least show you as being forthcoming should the worst case scenario appear and this all ends up in court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be a good idea to record your calls and tell them, if they refuse to continue with the call, it just shows they've got something to hide.

 

I doubt very much if they actually record outgoing calls, as more often than not, it's them who break the law, providing a source of proof would be self destructive. I think they would only record certain incoming calls, where the caller has to accept their terms.

 

I would, wherever possible keep communications in writing, it's harder for them to deny anything after they've put it in writing. It would certainly be advisable to inform them about the fraud case and the police involvement, and again, put it in writing (unsigned) and send it recorded, that way they can't deny they knew about it.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

as an introduction, I don't feel it could do you any harm.

 

I would possibly consider rewording the section "I obtained her (“Linda”) assurance that the matter will only be dealt with by yourself. Both Linda and I recorded the conversation so I do expect you to deal with this matter personally as the material contained herein includes information of a sensitive nature that I do not wish disseminated to all and sundry."

To something like.

"I received an assurance from your agent "Linda" that this matter would be dealt with solely by yourself. I have of course recorded this conversation and can refer back to the contents if necessary for confirmation. I would also appreciate a high level of discretion with regards to my personal information and that of the persons referred to in the documentation furnished to yourselves.

Cheers

Spamheed

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...