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

American Express - interesting one !!!


42man
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5966 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

Here is the story...

 

About 3 years ago, Amex took me to court to attempt to make me bankrupt (1 charge card owing about £300 and 2 credit cards about £13,000).....I went to court made a payment of £10,000 and foolishly got a charge on my house plus a payment of £50 per month to pay off the rest) I have sent a CCA request to their solicitors and they have said in roundabout terms that the 2 agreements for my credit cards were cancelled more than 6 years ago and under the circumstances they do not believe that the provisions of the Act apply (they mentioned the debit card provisions which I fully understand). I also sent a CCA request to AMEX back in September and have NEVER heard back....I have a feeling that there must be something between £1,500 and £2,500 plus some interest from 7 years ago (roundabout the time the accounts were closed)worth of charges on these accounts, I realise that if I send a SAR they may not have anything at all left on me (6 year limit on keeping paperwork)....I'd appreciate some learned opinion/experience on this situation....many thanks in advance...

Link to post
Share on other sites

As the accounts are closed the solicitors are right - the CCA does not apply in that they do not have to comply with a request under s77(1) or 78(1). ss77(3) and 78(3) say

(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to--

(a) an agreement under which no sum is, or will or may become, payable by the debtor

. You only way of getting information is via an SAR. The 6 years limitation does not apply to this - they must send all the information they have. Many companies keep data a lot longer than 6 years - you may be lucky. The limitaion Act 1980 applies to the charge claim in principle
5 Time limit for actions founded on simple contract

 

An action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.

However, s32 almost ceertainly applies
32 Postponement of limitation period in case of fraud, concealment or mistake

 

(1) Subject to subsections (3) and (4A) below, where in the case of any

action for which a period of limitation is prescribed by this Act, either--

(a) the action is based upon the fraud of the defendant; or

(b) any fact relevant to the plaintiff's right of action has been deliberately concealed from him by the defendant; or

© the action is for relief from the consequences of a mistake;

 

the period of limitation shall not begin to run until the plaintiff has discovered the fraud, concealment or mistake (as the case may be) or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it.

You paid the charges mistakenly thinking they were lawful and Amex have (at least recently) like all other financial intsitutions concealed the true nature of the charges. You only discovered this in the last few months.
  • Haha 1

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...