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 
        • 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

Do TNT deliver the mail?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5930 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 wonder if anyone can help with something that has been bugging me (sad I know!)?

My local Council allows Royal Mail vehicles to park anywhere, and they do just that, bus stops, zig zags you name it they park there. I emailed the Parking Dept to ask why this was allowed and was told Royal Mail vehicles are exempt from all restrictions but failed to explain why. I asked a local PA who said it was because the post was 'Royal' and it was an offence to hinder the Queens mail! :o What puzzles me is that since RM lost its monopoly in 2006 anyone can deliver the mail. Surely its then unfair for companies such as TNT and UPS to pay thousands of £s in fines for parking whilst RM can get away scot free isn't that unfair competition and would the companies in question have a case to take the Council to task over their policy?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Their claim looks ridiculous to me. Do they suggest that other drivers can "See through" a Royal Mail van and see a child about to run onto the road . Sounds like a good reason for making a public complaint to your MP and copy to the Minister of Transport. Then wait for the muck to hit the fan when a child gets killed in just such a scenario

Link to post
Share on other sites

What puzzles me is that since RM lost its monopoly in 2006 anyone can deliver the mail. Surely its then unfair for companies such as TNT and UPS to pay thousands of £s in fines for parking whilst RM can get away scot free isn't that unfair competition and would the companies in question have a case to take the Council to task over their policy?

 

No.

 

Whilst other companies can obtain licences to deliver mail, only Royal Mail has a condition forced upon them as part of their licence called the Universal Service Obligation. This means that, by law, they must deliver to every UK address on a daily basis.

 

The USO forms part of the Postal Services Act 2000. This piece of legislation also covers things like the exemptions from certain parking restrictions etc.

 

If someday things changed and TNT or some other company had the USO as part of their licence then they would have these exemptions instead of Royal Mail.

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No.

only Royal Mail has a condition forced upon them as part of their licence called the Universal Service Obligation.

Universal Service Obligation - Is that a euphemism for shafting everyone in the country with crap service and loads of lost mail.:D

 

Sound like an exercise in Orwellian doublespeak to me.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
I asked a local PA who said it was because the post was 'Royal' and it was an offence to hinder the Queens mail! :o

 

This is my first post on the forum so hi to all, but to partly answer your question, when I worked (briefly) for RM, I was told it was because the vehicles are on behalf of the queen and have the Royal crest on them.

Regards,

 

Rod...

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is my first post on the forum so hi to all, but to partly answer your question, when I worked (briefly) for RM, I was told it was because the vehicles are on behalf of the queen and have the Royal crest on them.

 

 

You forget the Queen is german and HER post is carried by Deutsche Post (DHL)!

 

bdupg8.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...