Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Under the consumer rights act 2015, if a defect manifests itself within 30 days and you have a right to return the vehicle for a full refund. If any defect manifests itself within the first six months of ownership then you have a right to return the vehicle for a full refund subject to the retailers right to carry out a repair. If the retailer declines to repair or if the repair fails then you have the right to return. The problem here is that you have to assert their right. It's a bit ridiculous – but you have to do let them know preferably in writing that you are asserting your rights under the consumer rights act either the 30 day right or the six month right. I suppose that you haven't done this – which would be quite understandable because most people don't know that these rights exist and that they are subject to these conditions – the condition that the right must be inserted. It is frankly ridiculous. The dealers know it and we have lots of instances of this company delaying appointments et cetera and our strong suspicion is that they are simply trying to run their customers out of time. On the basis that you haven't asserted your rights, we now have to look to ordinary contract law. You are entitled to purchase a vehicle which is of satisfactory condition and which remains that way for a reasonable period of time. Clearly it is in satisfactory. They are blaming you. Has your independent inspection identified the reason for the defect? This will be important because as you have seen BMW are already saying it is down to your driving and you are going to have to produce evidence that it wasn't down to your driving and the you drove it absolutely reasonably and it was simply the condition of the car. Have you been without the car for any period of time. Is it driveable now? If the car was off the road for a substantial amount of time and was still off the road then you would be able to argue that this is a fundamental breach of contract and that you have been deprived of substantially the whole benefit of the contract and therefore you will be entitled to treat the contract as breached by Big Motoring World and insist on cancelling the contract. It may be that you will eventually be obliged to keep the car but have the repairs paid for. Have you had any quotations for the work that needs doing? I asked you questions about the MOT – but you haven't responded.
    • A 'violent left wing mob', comprised of a chap in a red hoody with a damp polystyrene coffee cup and a bit of wet cement, gets nowhere near cowering frightened farage some distance away on top of his double decker bus .. as farages security and support seem to film the incident grinning     Farage bravely flinches, grimaces and seems to almost burst into tears as the 'objects managed to travel a part of the way toward his position on top of his bus. His reactions honed by having a bit of milk splash him at a prior incident allow him to swiftly fall into a protective cower and grimace .. .. Sometime after, once the mob of 1 had been safely bundled away, farage apparently wipes his eyes of tears, and rising from his cowed and frightened pose, bravely shouts “I will not be bullied or cowed by a violent left-wing mob who hate our country.” .. however few they may comprise of.   https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/nigel-farage-cement-barnsley-reform-uk-b2560501.html  
    • According to Parkopedia parking is limited to two hours.  I don't know how accurate this is though. What were you doing there for four hours?
    • no its friday 21st by 4pm if you'd done it properly and read the sticky in post 2 it clearly says: ^^^^^ NOTE : WHEN CALCULATING THE TIMELINE - PLEASE REMEMBER THAT THE DATE ON THE CLAIMFORM IS ONE IN THE COUNT [example: Issue date 01.03.2014 + 19 days (5 days for service + 14 days to acknowledge) = 19.03.2014 + 14 days to submit defence = 02.04.2014] = 33 days in total Date of issue XX + 19 days ( 5 day for service + 14 days to acknowledge) = XX + 14 days to submit defence = XX (33 days in total)  if your defence filing date falls on a W/End, you must file by friday @4PM  
    • Have had a read up just to double check last day to file defence is 24 June (claim form date is 22 May)
  • 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

any dca quoting rankin to get out of cca request


postggj
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5345 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 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Postggj,

 

I'm not aware of the rankin judgement, but if it was heard in the county court then it could not set any precedence what so ever, you have more information as to this case/judgement?

 

Cheers

Thanks

- Hobbie

 

--------------------------------------------------------

Under no circumstances should you speak with a Debt Collections Agency via telephone, request that all future correspondence is done in writing, a letter template for this can be located here.

 

Any views expressed are solely that of my own, any advice or information offered is provided in genuine good faith, and should be checked prior to acting upon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

many thanks babybear

 

just a sugestion

 

it seems more and more dca are quoting rankine case to confuse

 

maybe a good idea to have a template for a reply to a dca

 

if anybody care to write one up, any future enquiries can be sent to that thread

 

maybe a stickie

Link to post
Share on other sites

many thanks babybear

 

just a sugestion

 

it seems more and more dca are quoting rankine case to confuse

 

maybe a good idea to have a template for a reply to a dca

 

if anybody care to write one up, any future enquiries can be sent to that thread

 

maybe a stickie

Seems a good idea, I need that template!

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

many thanks babybear

 

just a sugestion

 

it seems more and more dca are quoting rankine case to confuse

 

maybe a good idea to have a template for a reply to a dca

 

if anybody care to write one up, any future enquiries can be sent to that thread

 

maybe a stickie

 

subbing, and that would be great if someone could do it :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

the Rankines were slightly misguided in their pleadings in my opinion, they tried to obtain a declaration of unenforceability on the basis that the lenders had failed to supply an agreement

 

this was an error and many DCAs are latching on to the judgment and trying to bend it to suit all the issues that they come across, it is a fact that with the right arguments you can distinguish the Rankine judgment

Link to post
Share on other sites

Case Law (or Common Law)

Law made by the courts to fill in gaps in law made by Parliament. Precedent is set by the Appeal Courts (eg House of Lords and Court of Appeal) and if similar circumstances prevail, then the lower courts must follow this precedent.

 

 

 

came across a definition of case law as above ,

 

 

 

 

if we quote the definition of case law it seems hard to suggest the rankin case can "pull rank " over case law

:cool: sunbathing in juan les pins de temps en temps

Link to post
Share on other sites

do we know about this ???

 

can someone confirm if it is true ??

 

....regarding the rankine case in fact ..............

 

"The general rule is that a person who is not a party to proceedings (meaning fred bloggs you or me ) may

obtain from the court records a copy of—

 

(a) a statement of case, but not any documents filed with or

attached to the statement of case, or intended by the party

whose statement it is to be served with it;

 

(b) a judgment or order given or made in public (whether made at

a hearing or without a hearing"

 

 

definition of statement of case is below

 

Statement of case

A statement of case is a document prepared by a party in litigation. It is designed to be a short document which formally sets out the core aspects of their position in the litigation. The phrase is an umbrella term. The following documents are know as statements of case: (a) claim form; (b) particulars of claim; © the defence; (d) reply to defence; (e) defence to the counterclaim; and (f) requests for further information.

:cool: sunbathing in juan les pins de temps en temps

Link to post
Share on other sites

LMAO! cant believe there quoting that case. Well ive already aired my views but if you have recieved a letter quoting rankine then try this letter:

 

Account Ref: xxxxxxxx

Dear Sirs

 

I refer to my letter dated XX/XX/XX in which I requested pursuant to s.77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for you to provide me with a true copy of the credit agreement relating to the above account, together with any other documentation the Act requires you to provide.

 

You have replied quoting the Rankine Vs HBOS & Others, claiming that you do not need to provide the requested information, This has surprised me, as no precedent was sent in this case, May i remind you of the following cases:

WILSON Vs FCT (2003) UKHL "the court considered that under the CCA, it was bound to uphold Mrs Wilson's arguments and declare the agreement to be unenforceable"

Dimond v Lovell [2000] 2 WLR 1121 where a credit hire company's loan agreements failed to stipulate the prescribed terms and were therefore, as Lord Hoffman put it, "irredeemably unenforceable"

 

I am sure that I do not need to remind you of your legal obligations under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, and the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPUTR).

 

If it is your view that you are not the creditor, s.175 of the CCA 1974 applies in the case of a simple assignment, and places a duty upon you to pass this request to the creditor. In the case of an absolute assignment, you are a creditor as defined by s.189. If you contend that you purchased the rights but not the duties of any agreement, you are reminded that s.189 of the Act is clear that an assignment is of both rights and duties.

 

If you are unsure of your legal obligations, please seek advice from either your legal department or you local CAB office.

 

Yours faithfully

 

That should sort them out if not wind them up! LOL

Edited by Jesteruk
Added Court cases
  • Haha 1

Halifax Bank - Owed £1599

23/3 - Data Protection Act sent

24/5 - Data Protection Act finally arrived

25/5 - Demand for repayment sent

04/10 Court bundle filed with court and Halifax

29/10 STAY ISSUED

JAN 08 - Currently being harrased by debt collectors!

Mar 08 - New DCA - Stopped in there tracks

Jun 08 - And another

Jul 08 - Complaint made to HBOS

Nov 08 - My accounts been sold to a DCA

Jan 09 - New complaint issued against HBOS

Mar 09 - Halifax re-aquired the debt

Apr 09 - Applying for Hardship.

 

at least they removed 2 defaults in selling accounts! :D

 

I dont not claim to know everything and any advice i give should be treated as MY opinion.

 

If ive been helpful tip the scales!

or better still

DONATE TO CAG - every tenner helps!

Link to post
Share on other sites

subscribing

When you've had all the help you need, make sure you stick around to help others too!

Just think, if everyone left the site after they'd got their help, there might not be anyone left the next time YOU come back needing more assistance!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

below is a link from the code of conduct issued by the solicitors regulatory authority

 

"the question is" just how close to the "......" are they ??

 

 

"Rule

 

11.01 Deceiving or misleading the court

 

  • (1) You must never deceive or knowingly or recklessly mislead the court.
     
     
     
    (2) You must draw to the court's attention:
    • (a) relevant cases and statutory provisions;
    • (b) the contents of any document that has been filed in the proceedings where failure to draw it to the court's attention might result in the court being misled; and
    • © any procedural irregularity.

    (3) You must not construct facts supporting your client's case or draft any documents relating to any proceedings containing:

    • (a) any contention which you do not consider to be properly arguable; or ..............."

source

http://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/code-of-conduct/198.article

  • Haha 1

:cool: sunbathing in juan les pins de temps en temps

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...