Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello dx100uk, After months of waiting for a response I finally got a reply and I must say it was the worst 4 months of my life the - fear of the unknown. So, they wrote back and said I was in the wrong BUT on this occasion they  would not take action but keep me on file for the next 12 months. It. was the biggest relief of my life a massive weight lifted -  I would like to thank you and the team for all your support
    • I have contacted the sofa shop who are sending someone out tomorrow to inspect the furniture. I suspect if anything a replacement will be offered although I would prefer a refund. Few photos of the wear in the material, this is how it was delivered.  
    • Yup, for goodness sake she needs to stop paying right now, DCA's are powerless, as .  Is it showing on their credit file? Best to use Check my file. All of the above advice is excellent, definitely SAR the loan company as soon as possible.
    • Hi all, I am wandering if this is appealable. It has already been through a challenge on the Islington website and the it was rejected. Basically there was a suspended bay sign on a post on Gee st which was obscured by a Pizza van. The suspension was for 3 bays outside 47 Gee st. I parked outside/between 47 & 55 Gee st. I paid via the phone system using a sign a few meters away from my car. When I got back to the car there was a PCN stuck to the windscreen which I had to dry out before I could read it due to rain getting into the plastic sticky holder.  I then appealed using the Islington website which was then rejected the next day. I have attached a pdf of images that I took and also which the parking officer took. There are two spaces in front of the van, one of which had a generator on it the other was a disabled space. I would count those as 3 bays? In the first image circled in red is the parking sign I read. In the 2nd image is the suspension notice obscured by the van. I would have had to stand in the middle of the road to read this, in fact that's where I was standing when I took the photo. I have pasted the appeal and rejection below. Many thanks for looking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This is my appeal statement: As you can see from the image attached (image 1) I actually paid £18.50 to park my car in Gee st. I parked the car at what I thought was outside 55 Gee st as seen in image 2 attached. When I read the PCN issued it stated there was a parking suspension. There was no suspension notice on the sign that I used to call the payment service outside number 55 Gee st. I looked for a suspension notice and eventually found one which was obscured by a large van and generator parked outside 47 Gee st. As seen in images 3 and 4 attached. I am guessing the parking suspension was to allow the Van to park and sell Pizza during the Clerkenwell design week. I was not obstructing the use or parking of the van, in fact the van was obstructing the suspension notice which meant I could not read or see it without prior knowledge it was there. I would have had to stand in the road to see it endangering myself as I had to to take images to illustrate the hidden notice. As there was no intention to avoid a parking charge and the fact the sign was not easily visible I would hope this challenge can be accepted. Many thanks.   This is the text from the rejection: Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a suspended bay or space. I note from your correspondence that there was no suspension notice on the sign that you used to call the payment serve outside number 55 Gee Street. I acknowledge your comments, however, your vehicle was parked in a bay which had been suspended. The regulations require the suspension warning to be clearly visible. It is a large bright yellow sign and is erected by the parking bay on the nearest parking plate to the area that is to be suspended. Parking is then not permitted in the bay for any reason or period of time, however brief. The signs relating to this suspension were sited in accordance with the regulations. Upon reviewing the Civil Enforcement Officer's (CEO's) images and notes, I am satisfied that sufficient signage was in place and that it meets statutory requirements. Whilst I note that the signage may have been obstructed by a large van and generator at the time, please note, it is the responsibility of the motorist to locate and check the time plate each time they park. This will ensure that any changes to the status of the bay are noted. I acknowledge that your vehicle possessed a RingGo session at the time, however, this does not authorize parking within a suspended bay. Suspension restrictions are established to facilitate specific activities like filming or construction, therefore, we anticipate the vehicle owner to relocate the vehicle from the suspended area until the specified date and time when the suspension concludes. Leaving a vehicle unattended for any period of time within a suspended bay, effectively renders the vehicle parked in contravention and a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) may issue a PCN. Finally, the vehicle was left parked approximately 5 metres away from the closest time plate notice. It is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they park in a suitable parking place and check all signs and road markings prior to leaving their vehicle parked in contravention. It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is parked legally at all times. With that being said, I would have to inform you, your appeal has been rejected at this stage. Please see the below images as taken by the CEO whilst issuing the PCN: You should now choose one of the following options: Pay the penalty charge. We will accept the discounted amount of £65.00 in settlement of this matter, provided it is received by 10 June 2024. After that date, the full penalty charge of £130.00 will be payable. Or Wait for a Notice to Owner (NtO) to be issued to the registered keeper of the vehicle, who is legally responsible for paying the penalty charge. Any further correspondence received prior to the NtO being issued may not be responded to. The NtO gives the recipient the right to make formal representations against the penalty charge. If we reject those representations, there will be the right of appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicator.   Gee st pdf.pdf
    • Nationwide Building Society has launched an 18 month fixed-rate account paying 5.5%.View the full article
  • 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 
      • 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

chipped tooth from foreign body in burger


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5867 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 hope I'm posting this in the right part of the forum.

 

A few months ago, I was eating a burger (from a frozen ready meal) when I bit into something that broke part of a tooth. It felt like a bit of bone or glass, I'm not sure as I spat it out and rinsed my mouth immediately.

 

My dentist fixed the chipped tooth by filing it down. Since then it hasn't felt right. It's as if that tooth became sensitive, which it wasn't before.

 

I don't want to name the company at this stage. I contacted their customer services, they send me a bag to return the rest of the burgers for analysis which I did. They then sent me a letter saying they would pay my dentist bill. I sent them the bill and heard nothing since.

 

Has anyone else experienced something like this? How did the company deal with your complaint?

I'm really angry with them now and I want some compensation as well as the dentist bill paid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They didn't admit anything and make no mention of any findings in the burgers I sent back - not that I expected them to.

 

They worded it like this "I am sorry to hear that dental treatment was required and we would certainly wish to give sympathetic consideration to the reimbursement of these costs. Please send me the original copy of your dental bill".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, I am definitely contacting them again.

After reading the "spring roll containing a stone" thread, I have also decided to contact the food standard agency.

 

I still would like to hear from someone who went through the same thing, surely this must have happened to others?

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL

Actually since then, I haven't been able to eat things like sausages and burgers. Maybe I should thank them for putting me off junk food ;)

 

Seriously now, after doing some research on the web I found out this company has done this to other customers:

They ask you to send in the foreign body or remaining food and then you never hear about their findings. I suspect they do this to make sure you don't keep any "evidence", rather than actually analysing the food. Maybe I'm too cynical for my own good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just out of interest... which company is it ? I know of one company that advertises its sausages under a certain "Recipe"... which, when analysed on some TV programme made me feel sick. :(

 

Did wonder why they were always on offer though....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, About 4 or 5 years ago I chipped a tooth on a stone which was found in a hash brown from a famous fast food outlet. I took the chewed contents of my mouth (chipped tooth included) stright to the counter where I was offered a replacement hash brown - nothing more. I refused the replacement and asked to speak to the manager who placed the remains of the hash brown and the chewed food into a plastic bag for analysis. I received a letter about 6 weeks later with an apology stating that it was indeed stones found in the hash brown but this was perfectly normal as the potatoes had come from the ground!!!! As a gesture of goodwill they enclosed vouchers to the value of £10...I contacted them explaining that my tooth had undergone dental work and enclosed a copy of my bill...I eventually received a refund for the dental work 6 months later...

I also found a fingernail in a yogurt from a very famous high street store and returned the yogurt and nail to them which were sent off for analysis. I received a letter from them after a few weeks which stated that they could not confirm what the foreign object was as it had been "lost" in transit when en route for analysis, however they enclosed a cheque for £100 as a gesture of goodwill (seems a very generous gesture as they didn't know what it was...) and also some vouchers. Funnily enough I went into the store and purchased some pre-cooked chicken with my vouchers only to discover that the chicken was out of date, so yes you guessed it, I complained about the out of date chicken and received a full refund PLUS another £10 of vouchers...

I suppose that goes into the realms of another thread for another time but it amazes me how many out of date items there are in the fridges of my local supermarket...

Link to post
Share on other sites

received a letter about 6 weeks later with an apology stating that it was indeed stones found in the hash brown but this was perfectly normal as the potatoes had come from the ground!!!!

That's priceless :shock: :grin:

 

I wonder how these companies get away with it?

After all, it is an injury caused by their product. Isn't the onus on them to make sure their products are safe to eat?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Here is the letter from Birds Eye in jpeg format:

http://i25.tinypic.com/fvd7yd.jpg

 

They got their facts wrong.

I did not use that envelope to return my bill, I returned it later with another envelope from another letter from them.

I returned the burgers to them (I have proof of postage), they didn't analyze them. I can't return a foreign body which I spat out together with a bit of tooth :mad: I explained this very clearly in my letters to them.

They also contradict themselves, as they previously told me they never got my dentist's bill. In any case, it's irrelevant now.

 

There is nothing more I can do about it except give them the bad publicity they so richly deserve.

 

If anyone has the same problem, here is what you should:

- do NOT send any evidence to the company

- contact your local council, they will direct you to someone who's in charge of food safety. Send any evidence to them directly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...