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
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5828 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 have arrears of 2007 council Tax with Glasgow City council. Originally it got to the stage where Sheriff Officers A had gotten one of these attachment orders which I challenged and A appeared to back down and accepted a repayment plan. Meanwhile I have continued to pay my 2008 Council Tax Bill on time. I have also been keeping to my repayment agreemen in respect to my 2007 arrears.

 

Today a letter from a new Sheriff Officers B. This letter states that they have been appointed by Glasgow City council to recover from me the outstanding amount. They then go on to to say that it os essential that i contact them wothin 7 days and arrange settlement of these arrears , or to re-negotiate any agreement i had with A. They then say failure to contact them may result in enforcement action proceeding against me without further notice. Thhey then go on to say that i should make all payments directly to them and not to A.

 

Anyone else experienced this tactic from these people?

 

There is also a bit where they show what appears to be like a statement of account that shows payments received as being nil. Although it may be that they are showing that i have made them no payments.

 

Another question should they be showing assignment deeds?

 

Though I am reading some threads and it would appear that i may be able to ignore them and go drectly to the council -

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bailiffs-sheriff-officers/58550-council-tax-bailiffs.html

 

Does this link above apply to scotland?

Edited by RFC1872
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Scottish Law is different to English - I know nothing about Scots Law - can I suggest that you ask a moderator to move this thread to the section on scottish debts and law

If I've helped feel free to add to my reputation.

 

I am not a Practising Lawyer. My comments are my opinion only. You should not rely upon those comments and should always take your own professional advice from a practising Solicitor or Barrister

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be worth asking your council just when exactly they passed it from Thug A to Thug B, and when they informed you of it. As far as you are aware you are still dealing with A, and keeping up your payments. In England its called "Assignment". They should at least have the courtesy to tell you, otherwise, any old Tom, Dick or Harry could come along and say you owe money.

 

Get it in wriring from your council, that it now belongs to Thug B before you do anything else. It might also be worth asking Thug A for a statement of account, so that you see how much has been paid (as well as using it as evidence, should it get nasty with Thug B).

 

As for the fact it's in Scotland, I'm afraid I can't comment on that, as it's already been mentioned, Scots law would be different.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies, I will now be approaching glasgow city cooncil and asking them about about change from a to b. Also I will be offering to make the payments direct.

 

I have a feeling the switch from a to b is so they can attempt to ask for more. It appears the cooncil has not managed its budget well, the big cooncil they call an assembly has frozen any chance they had of increasing the council tax bills. So I s'pose its a strategy to increase the income from those who found themselves in arrears.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...