Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • next time dont upload 19 single page pdfs use the sites listed on upload to merge them into one multipage pdf.. we aint got all day to download load single page files 2024-01-15 DBCLegal SAR.pdf
    • If you have not kept the original PCN you can always send an SAR to Excel and they have to send you all the info they have on you within a month. failure to do so can lead to you being able to sue them for their failure.......................................nice irony.
    • Thank you and well done  for posting up all those notices it must have have taken you ages.. The entrance sign is very helpful since the headline states                    FREE PARKING FOR CUSTOMERS ONLY in capitals with not time limit mentioned. Underneath and not in capitals they then give the actual times of parking which would not be possible to read when driving into the car park unless you actually stopped and read them. Very unlikely especially arriving at 5.30 pm with possibly other cars behind. On top of that the Notice goes on to say that the terms and conditions are inside the car park so the entrance sign cannot offer a contract it is merely an offer to treat. Inside the car park the signs are mostly too high up and the font size too small to be able to read much of their signs. DCBL have not shown a single sign that can be read on their SAR. Although as they show photographs which were taken the year after your alleged breach we do not know what the signs were when you were there. For instance the new signs showed the charge was then £100 whereas your PCN was for £85. Who knows, when you were there perhaps the time was for 3 hours. They were asked to produce  planning permission which would have been necessary for the ANPR cameras alone and didn't do so. Nor did they provide a copy of the contract-DCBL  "deeming them disproportionate or not relevant to the substantive issues in the dispute" How arrogant and untruthful is that? The contract and planning permission could be vital to having the claim thrown out. I can find no trace of planning permission for the signs nor the cameras on Tonbridge Council planning portal. and the contract of course is highly relevant since some contracts advise the parking rouges that they cannot take motorists to Court. I understand that Europarks are now running that car park which means that nexus didn't  last long before being thrown out.....................................
    • Hi,   I am not sure if I posted this already here but I don't think I did. I attach a judgement that raises very interesting points IMO. Essentially EVRi did their usual non attendance that we normally see, however the judge (for the first time I've seen in these threads) dismissed the notice and awarded me judgement by default because their notice misses the "confirmation of compliance" paragraph. in and out in 3 minutes (aside from the chat at the end with the judge about his problems with evri) Redacted - evri CPR loss.pdf
    • Just to update this. I did apply to strikeout and they did not attend the hearing. I won by defualt and the hearing lasted 5 minutes (court only allocated 15). The judge simply explained that the only matter he was really considering is if the Defendant could have any oral evidence to defend the claim. However he said he had decided that based on their defence, and their misunderstanding of law, and their non attendence he did not think they had any reasonsable chance so he awarded me SJ + Costs on the claim form + the strikeout fee. Luckily when I sent the defendant the order I woke up the next day to a wire trasnfer for the full sum of the judgement
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Nokia N95 8GB


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5370 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

3 weeks ago I took out a contract with 3 for a Nokia N95 8GB. One of the main reasons I chose this phone was to transfer videos so i could watch them during my lunch hour. From day 1 the videos would convert and transfer properly, but there was a problem: after 35 mins and 50 seconds, the video would freeze and only the audio would continue.

 

At first I thought it may be a propblem with something I was doing, but after persevering for a few weeks, I now realise it's either a fault with my handset, or a problem with the model of phone.

 

My question is this: Do my statutory rights allow me to cancel the contract and return the phone, or must I send it to them and allow them to try to repair it? I am still within 28 days of purchase.

 

Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems as if you want to get out of the contract rather than having the phone repaired. I believe if they offered you a replacement/repair this would end their obligation.

Whatever I post is my opinion and should be taken as such, an opinion. While it is what I believe and is offered in good faith, it should not be taken as a statement of truth

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a possibility that you're running on old Firmware, it might be a good idea to check and see whether you (or they) can flash the handset. There are a number of issues, the most being the earlier (non 8 Gb) handset. Unfortunately, none of this affects your contract for cellphone service which will continue regardless of whether you drop your phone down the loo, or spill a pint of beer over it. Show the problem to the store in the first instance, and see if their demo handset does the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems as if you want to get out of the contract rather than having the phone repaired. I believe if they offered you a replacement/repair this would end their obligation.

 

I would have been perfectly happy with a replacement. However, the best they would offer is a repair. I am not prepared to accept this as they gave me a faulty handset to start with. I shouldn't have to accept a brand new handset with a fault and an offer to repair.

 

I think I'll cancel and see where this one goes.

 

Comments/advice welcome.

 

thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a possibility that you're running on old Firmware, it might be a good idea to check and see whether you (or they) can flash the handset. There are a number of issues, the most being the earlier (non 8 Gb) handset. Unfortunately, none of this affects your contract for cellphone service which will continue regardless of whether you drop your phone down the loo, or spill a pint of beer over it. Show the problem to the store in the first instance, and see if their demo handset does the same.

 

Firmware up to date, shop handset does not have this problem according to the salesperson. The offered a repair but not a replacement on a handset issued to me with a fault and right now less than 28 days into the contract.

 

Not sure that the contract will continue. It seems to me the phone company broke the contract when they supplied me with a handset not fit for purpose (Sale Of Goods act 1979 as amended) and refuses to replace it with one that is fit for purpose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

nice video, tanachaiwisit. Thanks for that. However, it doesn't show the video playback or mention any problem that might exist.

 

As an update, I wrote to 3 explaining the situation and telling them to cancel my contract and to arrange collection of the faulty phone they sold me. They ignored my letter (of course) and have been sending the usual threatening letters. The phone has been boxed and unused since the day I wrote to them.

 

I intend to see this all the way through and I'll update as things happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

good luck. I don't know what logic they've been using, but as you say Sale Of Goods act 1979 says "The quality of the goods sold must be satisfactory" and a phone that has video playback as a major feature does not play video correctly is far from that as long as you are sure that the fault is with the phone and not the video files!

If in doubt, contact a qualified insured legal professional (or my wife... she knows EVERYTHING)

 

Or send a cheque or postal order payable to Reclaim the Right Ltd.

to

923 Finchley Road London NW11 7PE

 

 

Click here if you fancy an email address that shows you mean business! (only £6 and that will really help CAG)

 

If you can't donate, please use the Internet Search boxes on the CAG pages - these will generate a small but regular income for the site

 

Please also consider using the

C.A.G. Toolbar

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

A year and a half later, 3 periodically send me half-hearted letters demanding £78 (I have no idea where they come up with that figure).

 

The phone is still sitting boxed and collecting dust behind my computer monitor and will remain there until the day they send me an envelope and an address where I can post it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love these phones Craig! Have been using 2 for the last 2 years for my business (very heavy use) and both are still going strong.

 

3 are notoriously poor when it comes to customer service. My husband was sent a faulty phone which was only evident when turned on because one of the buttons didn't work. He called them to reject the day it was received but 3 argued because he had turned on the phone he had lost his right to return it to them and cancel.

 

We ended up writing to head office who accepted the phone back but didn't admit they were wrong or apologise!

 

I agree with Buzby - check your credit file.

-->> Supporting Dog Rescue <<--

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...