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 
      • 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

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


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5017 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 Martin is right (He is not always!).

 

The Judge said his announcement would be made on a Friday so the banks had the weekend to prepare so there must have either been a change of heart or the banks have known since last week!

 

 

The notion that the banks already know the outcome of the judgment is a myth.

 

Neither the banks or the OFT themselves will have notification of the judgment before tomorrow.

 

Justice Smith made it very clear that the 'embargoed' judgment would only be made privvy to 2 legal representitives of each bank and the OFT.

 

Their are strict rules in the commercial courts that prevent the parties themselves from having prior notice of judgment - not least to deter insider trading of shares.

__________________

Please note I am not an expert - I am not offering opinions or legal help - Please use all the information provided on the site in FAQ- step by step instructions and library- thanks Jansus:)

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif

offer from A&L 24/8/07 - after case stayed

 

"What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well." - Antione de Saint Exupery

 

 

PROUD TO BE AN ORANGE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 5.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I also heard the Judge.........is going to order the banks refund the charges just before going on his hols.........so as to avoid the wrath of the bankers...........Of course not...a rumor......is a rumor.......is a rumor...on the otherhand.......if it's true;)

 

I heard all claims were going to be paid in lottery tickets - well, I can speculate as well can't I?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Justice Smith made it very clear that the 'embargoed' judgment would only be made privvy to 2 legal representitives of each bank and the OFT.

 

And do you think that the banks QCs have not reported to their clients?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder will the current credit situation will sway the decision. The current credit climate has placed a burden on the banks ad maybe the decision will veer towards saving the banks a few bob and in turn save the government a few bob bailing them out.....

 

This is what I have been thinking lately, sadly I wouldn't put it past them :mad:

PLEASE DONATE ANYTHING THAT YOU CAN

 

 

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.

George Bernard Shaw

 

 

 

 

Go on, click me scales (if I have helped) :grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know about "not long to wait", HF, it's pretty much a given that the losing side will appeal... I do however believe that a judgment in favour of the OFT would increase the chances of things changing drastically, after all, the court of appeals would only overturn his ruling if the other side could come up with very convincing arguments to show that his decision was wrong!

 

I wonder whether, if the OFT wins, whether the banks will then start refunding more easily even before the decision of Appeals... Ah well, a girl can dream... :razz:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest vortex

Conniff, I cannot give you rep as I am under quasi moderation status, but I did chuckle to myself about that quote.

I was down the Dog and Duck chinese takeaway(I think they do use those ingredients in their meals, allegedly) and there was a bloke there that said that Justice Smith was going to have a wig on tomorrow, I didn't know he was bald :)

Seriously, though,this is just the first battle but it is nice if media reports of an OFT win comes to fruition.

 

 

 

**********cannot do signature either but if you found this post funny please click on the rep button cos I ain't gonna get any other messages ******

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just pay me in beer tokens, i'll be happy for a few years :smile:

PLEASE DONATE ANYTHING THAT YOU CAN

 

 

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.

George Bernard Shaw

 

 

 

 

Go on, click me scales (if I have helped) :grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not being funny, but the judge wouldn't dare be swayed.

He will have to give a verdict on what the fact before him were, not what or who will be effected by the results.

 

Just think about it for a moment, one chink in this case and either the banks or the OFT will scream.

 

Just think how many of us will be reading between every letter to see if there could have been a mistake if we lose. Also if the banks had had a better defence they would have handed it too the judge at the time, not held it in hand for an apppeal.

 

He really did have a hard job doing this case, and one whisper of anything and someone would tell.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not quite the case - the judge agreed to give both sides 48 hours prior knowledge of his judgement - so the banks do actually know as do the OFT and will have known from yesterday

 

My information came from the BBC News - Friday, 8 February 2008

 

In court, several bank barristers expressed unease that Mr Justice Smith's eventual findings might leak out in the time between him circulating a draft ruling to the parties to the case, and handing down his final public decision.

"The key point is to ensure there is no breach of confidentiality on the draft judgement," said Mr Ali Malek for the Abbey bank.

Mr Justice Smith said he was "deeply troubled" by such a scenario.

He then decided that his draft judgement would be sent out only to a "very tight circle" of named lawyers for the OFT, seven banks and the Nationwide building society.

Earlier in the proceedings the barrister for Lloyds TSB, Mr Bankim Thanki QC, had expressed concern that once the judge's decision was known the banks would be inundated with calls from customers asking about their claims.

He had asked that the draft judgement be circulated on a Friday to give his bank time to digest it over a weekend and to prepare to respond to its customers.

 

 

This would suggest that the banks would be made aware of the descition and staff would have to be briefed in order to deal with the influx of enquiries.

Link to post
Share on other sites

not being funny, but the last place i am going to enquire is my bank.

 

rather wait for official news.

 

whatever the result the banks will twist it to their own end anyway

 

if it's not in their favour then they will appeal.

 

get set for another waiver from the good old FSA people. i do not expect anything less.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Think possitive conquer it might not make you happy by the sounds of it but it will definately make me happier cus I will go overdrawn again just to pay for it:) :) :) ;) ...SELV..

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have claims in the court which are stayed, tomorrows findings will not see all our claims to now be heared?

 

So you saying, if we win tomorrow we can then go overdrawn and the banks wont be allowed to charge us?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of drink

 

Why not interest paid on our savings account lets say a rate of 30%

 

Tax free

 

Fixed term deal for 10 years

 

J

 

I would assume the banks would take all the consumers to court claiming we where being unfair in asking for a disproportionately high sum of interest

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...