Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What's your intent, or interest? I can't see that you have any cause of action regarding bills issued by one third party to another third party. Is the idea to use this as a lever "I'll denounce you to HMRC unless you do blah blah .." That might in fact have no teeth anyway, HMRC will aware of the company's turnover via their other tax affairs.  As a matter of fact a company buying VAT rated supplies and selling to VAT registered customers is actually worse off if not VAT registered themselves. Has your court case reached it's conclusion yet?
    • Hello, welcome to CAG.  I expect people will be along to advise later. We aren't here to mock, this is a serious forum. If you feel you're being picked on  report the relevant post to the site team.  Best, HB
    • no that is not a defence. because you don't have a photo
    • I purchased the vehicle using finance through motonovo under a HP 60 months agreement. I have now amended the document ensuring all is in black. Unfortunately, this email has now been sent. However, I have not sent a letter to big motoring world. Also, I have taken the section of the firealarm issue. I am struggling to convert to PDF. I am not tech savy at all. My mistake was that the the salesman was very fussy on a sale. We went down a quiet road for a little test drive and not for a lengthy road test. The water issue was not present at this moment of time. However, it only became prevalent after driving away, after all docs signed. I did stated to Audi I wanted a diagnostic report. However, they carried out an Audicam which is footage of the issue. Audi have diagnosed the issue as a common issue where coupes/cabriolets accumulate water in the seals. However, I did state beforehand for no issue to be rectified due to me wanting to reject the vehicle. I am awaiting a report from Audi through email from the branch manager in relation to the issue. The issue so far is the water still being present in the sills. Audi tried to fix the issue however the problem is still prevalent. Regards 
  • 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

what is the situation currently?


Foo
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5958 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

Have had a search round the forum but with so much information and so many sections id be here all week looking for an answer possibly.

 

I claimed my charges back last year but got put on a stay, didnt want to chase the stay to get it lifted as id thought id be patient, which i am being so far. also all monies taken were whilst i was on benefits but wasnt aware that the banks/courts should of known about this when i originally put my claim in.

 

i may be wrong but im expecting the banks to lose, so in turn will be expecting my monies regardless. if this is so, then probably no need for me to do anything other than wait to hear from them again as ive not heard anything from anyone since last year now.

 

is there anything i should be chasing? or am i ok where i am being patient?

 

thanks in advance.

 

p.s. it isnt a huge amount but is a when there charges amount to 80% of my weekly income.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Foo

 

I'm sure someone more in the know will be along shortly to help you.

 

As far as I understand it the banks cannot take charges from benefits.

 

It maybe that they did not know you where on benefits. Someone will be along soon to give you advise on where to go to from here :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a process called the "Right of Appropriation" if you use search at the top of the forum im sure you will find an informative explaination regarding benefits :)

As far as the case is concerned i think one persons guess is as good as another, be nice to see it go in the publics favour tho ;)

honey x

 

 

read about 'ROA' a while ago, after id sent the claim in which was around this time last year!

 

all the paperwork went through before i got the knowledge about the ROA.

 

all said and done the case got stayed and am happy to await the outcome but am guessing as always i gotta chase this up.

 

 

So, theres is a huge court case yes? involving the banks? and no-one here knows whats going on with the case or the claims?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OFT case has finished and we are all now waiting on the judges ruling this could take several weeks ...... cant be more precise as the judge wasnt very precise :)

 

There is a sub forum just for the case here ... http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/oft-test-case-updates/ :)

 

saint

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OFT case has finished and we are all now waiting on the judges ruling this could take several weeks ...... cant be more precise as the judge wasnt very precise

 

 

That's right he wasn't very precise. Most estimates are for May, so I'm not sure what your 'several weeks' is based on. I'd say that was wildly optimistic. My guess would be 6 months

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OFT case has finished and we are all now waiting on the judges ruling this could take several weeks ...... cant be more precise as the judge wasnt very precise :)

 

There is a sub forum just for the case here ... http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/oft-test-case-updates/ :)

 

saint

 

thanks, thats the info i was after.

 

nice n simple, cheers.

 

ill sit tight now for a few weeks :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like he's busy anyway and is currently presiding over other cases

 

COURT 76

Before MR JUSTICE ANDREW SMITH

Friday 22 February 2008

At 10:00

2008-134 Calais Shipholding Co v Bronwen Trading Ltd & Anr

 

At 14:00

2007-1439 David Harris & 50 Others v The Society Of Lloyds

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...