Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All
Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

H.O.L Test case appeal. Judgement Declared. ***See Announcements***

freakyleaky
 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5027 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

  • Replies 5.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

TheyrCriminals

TheyrCriminals

Posted
Posted

Hi Guys,

 

I have searched but I can not find the grounds on which the banks have been granted leave to appeal. As we all know a party can not appeal a court judgement because they simply don't like it, they have to have grounds for an appeal. Does anyone know what grounds the banks submitted an appeal for? Procedural irregularity? New evidence? Judge error?

 

TheyrCriminals

Link to post
Share on other sites
TheyrCriminals

TheyrCriminals

Posted
Posted (edited)

Im sorry to keep asking this but no one has helped as yet. Can someone please tell me or direct me to the arguments submitted to the Court by the banks that led the judge to grant them an appeal. I have not found a single argument put forward yet and as you know the banks can not simply appeal because they dont like the decision they have to have grounds.

 

Thank you.

 

TheyrCriminals

Edited by TheyrCriminals
Link to post
Share on other sites
TheyrCriminals

TheyrCriminals

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hi Guys,

 

As I understand it the 'buffer zone' Barclays is offering for 5 days at a cost of £22 is optional. You do not have to take it. You can instead just keep paying £8 for each bounced item (up to 5 a day), be it an unpaid direct debit/standing order or returned cheque etc. I have to say that is a stark improvement on £35 which is the current charge not £30. So depending on how many bounced items you have in a day, if it is just one bounced item your charge has been slashed from £35 to £8. The figure of £8 is still too high and we have a long way to go, but it does look like at long last one bank is beginning to move in the right direction. Let's not underestimate this hugley significant development.

 

TheyrCriminals

Edited by TheyrCriminals
Link to post
Share on other sites
TheyrCriminals

TheyrCriminals

Posted
Posted (edited)

MilkTrayMan,

 

You can not accrue an infinite amount of these charges in one day, 5 is the maximum, so what your saying is that if you do have 5 bounced items in one day you will be paying an extra £5 compared to the old system. The £35 was certainly not a one off charge either. Under Barclays old system you could have dozens of £35 unpaid item fees in any one month - I know I had them! Now I will only be charged £8 instead of £35 every time which is a dramatic reduction but I accept still not good enough. Besides how many of us have 5 bounced items per day every other day from our bank accounts?

 

In addition I am certainly not forgetting those who are in a less fortunate financial position than myself.

 

TheyrCriminals

Edited by TheyrCriminals
Link to post
Share on other sites
TheyrCriminals

TheyrCriminals

Posted
Posted

JonCris,

 

I'm sorry I dont think I understand what you mean. Are you saying that companies are attempting to apply a direct debit for the same item several times in one day? And with regards to cancelling any direct debit, surely the bank will cancel it immediately/within 24 hours on receiving such an instruction from their customer?

 

TheyrCriminals

Link to post
Share on other sites
TheyrCriminals

TheyrCriminals

Posted
Posted

MilkTrayMan,

 

Barclays will not charge you £8 per day for the same bounced item!! It will charge you £8 per day if you bounce 1 item every single day!

 

You said:

 

Thus the poor become even poorer...to help finance those that MAY save the odd bob or two under the NEW T&C's...:sad:

 

Please elaborate.

 

TheyrCriminals

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
TheyrCriminals

TheyrCriminals

Posted
Posted

Hi Guys,

 

I can not find anything on the OFT report regarding its investigation into bank charges. I understood that the OFT would hand over its preliminary report to the judge in a letter by the end of July. It is now the 5th August, has there been any developments?

 

TheyrCriminals

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
TheyrCriminals

TheyrCriminals

Posted
Posted

Hi Guys,

 

Could someone please tell me where I can find the new criteria for claiming hardship, which I understand has been revised and clarified recently by the FSA. Would there be a hardship claim for someone who has been written off work sick for 12 months, although working now, who has many debts building up, has accrued a number of CCJ's and is one step away from a repossession order being made on his home.

 

Thanks.

 

TheyrCriminals

Link to post
Share on other sites
TheyrCriminals

TheyrCriminals

Posted
Posted

Hi Guys,

 

I have read the FSA revised guidelines on financial hardship criteria, but does anyone know how successful this is in practice, are claims of genuine financial hardship being allowed to progress and not having to wait for the outcome of the test case?

 

Thanks

 

TheyrCriminals

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
TheyrCriminals

TheyrCriminals

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hi,

 

A solicitor has pointed out to me that even if the judgement on the historic terms is that they do not equate to penalties at common law it should not be assumed that business claims now have no legal basis. The solicitor pointed out that the judge hearing the test case has not considered a single business contract or any business terms and conditions during the test case, and so reliance on the judgement would be unjust for business claimants. Any judge would need to consider the contract between the business customer and bank and the business terms and conditions before a fair ruling can be delivered.

 

Any thoughts?

 

TheyrCriminals

Edited by TheyrCriminals
Link to post
Share on other sites
TheyrCriminals

TheyrCriminals

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hi Phantom,

 

No you're perfectly safe. Even if one part of your claim fails it doesnt mean the other part will and so your claim is still valid and still a live claim. So long as your claim incorporates the UTCCR's you're fine.

 

Chin up.

 

TheyrCriminals

Edited by TheyrCriminals
Link to post
Share on other sites
TheyrCriminals

TheyrCriminals

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hi,

 

A solicitor has pointed out to me that even if the judgement on the historic terms is that they do not equate to penalties at common law it should not be assumed that business claims now have no legal basis. The solicitor pointed out that the judge hearing the test case has not considered a single business contract or any business terms and conditions during the test case, and so reliance on the judgement would be unjust for business claimants. Any judge would need to consider the contract between the business customer and bank and the business terms and conditions before a fair ruling can be delivered.

 

Any thoughts?

 

TheyrCriminals

user_online.gifreputation.gif report.gif

Edited by TheyrCriminals
Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...