Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Regretfully it does. Have you actually seen any papers which show what you were charged with (rather than what you were convicted of)? It is unusual not to be “dual charged” but if you were not charged with both, you are where you are. If you had been charged with both offences and providing you were the driver at the time, you could, after performing your SD, have asked the prosecutor to drop the “Fail to Provide” (FtP) charges in exchange for a guilty plea to the speeding charges (you cannot be convicted of speeding unless you plead guilty as they have no evidence you were driving). You will have difficulty defending the FtP charges. In fact, it’s worse than that – you have no chance of successfully defending them at all because the reason you did not respond to the requests is because you did not receive them and that’s entirely your fault. No it’s not correct. Six months from 18/11/23 was 18/5/24 so, unless they were originally charged, the speeding offences are now “timed out.” There is one avenue left open to you. If you perform your SD you must serve it on the court which convicted you. You will then receive a date for a hearing to have the matters heard again. Your only chance of having the matters revert to speeding (and this is only providing you were the driver at the time of those offences) is to plead Not Guilty, attend court and ask the prosecutor (very nicely, explaining what a pillock you know you were for failing to update your  V5C) if (s)he is prepared to raise “out of time” speeding charges, to which you will offer to plead guilty if the FtP charges are dropped.   This is strictly speaking not lawful. Charges have to be raised within six months. Some prosecutors are willing to do it, others are not. But frankly it’s the only avenue open to you. There is a risk with this. I imagine you have been fined £660 (plus surcharge and costs) for each offence. The offence attracts a fine of 1.5 week’s net income and where the court has no information about the defendant’s means a default figure of £440pw is used.  If the prosecutor is not prepared to play ball you can revise your pleas to guilty. A sympathetic court should give you the full discount (one third) for your guilty pleas in these circumstances but they may reduce the discount somewhat. The prosecution may also ask for increased costs (£90 or thereabouts is the figure for a guilty plea). So it may cost you more if you have a decent income (I’ll let you do the sums). But MS90 is an endorsement code which gives insurers a fit of the vapours. One such endorsement will see your premiums double. Two of them will see many insurers refuse to quote you at all. So you really want to exhaust every possibility of avoiding them if you can. One warning: do not pay solicitors silly money to defend you. Making an SD before a solicitor should attract just a nominal sum (perhaps a tenner). That’s all you should pay for. You have no viable defence against the FtP charges and any solicitor suggesting you have is telling you porkies. The offer to do the deal is easily done by yourself and you can save the solicitor’s fees to put towards a few taxis and increased insurance premiums if you are unsuccessful. In the happy event you find out you were "dual charged", let me know and I'll tell you how to proceed. (Seems a bit odd hoping you were charged with four driving offences rather than two, but it's a funny old world!).    
    • Just the sort of people you despise eh Jugg  You would be much happier among your mates in that room with Rayner begging for votes 
    • I see the trial of the real criminal in the Biden Family has started rather than the sham political persecution of Trump    Biden will of course try to distance himself as far as possible to no avail  Even more votes for The Donald🤣    
    • Savings platform Raisin UK is offering a £50 bonus for new customers who sign up for an account.View the full article
    • With Farage back in the news, here's a reminder of his interview with Claire Byrne on Irish TV a few years ago.  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

Car serviced by Audi last week now I have a suspected Head gasket failure! PLEASE HELP


S.O.L
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5587 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 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Well after kicking up a fuss and writing a strongly worded letter making it clear that I am not just going to disappear without a very public fight, they have sent me 2 letters. The most recent one has asked for evidence of the recent service and MOT that was carried out prior to the warranty being purchased so that they can investigate the matter further??!!

 

I am getting really frustrated by the whole saga....alternative transportation is starting to cost me a small fortune and on top of it the garage where my car is are chasing me everyday!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe this is still going on! :eek:

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

Me either....and the worst of it is an Audi Cab is meant to be seen on the road NOT on the drive:confused:

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello just putting my two penny worth in , i thought this was sorted long time ago , did you try the SMMT as i had posteded way back ?, once they got involved in my very simalar case between my warranty company and a car dealer things moved a long rapido, just trying to help, my car was off road for 6 months whilst i was going from pillar to post .

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Any updates? Please don't say it's not sorted!

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

Hi Sol

I am having exactly the same prob with my porsche boxster and have just had to shell out £1300.00 to get it back on the road and they refuse to cover it under warranty....although it is a warranty issue. Get the FOS involved i am pinning my hopes on them and hoping to get the repairs cost paid back and also over £1000.00 in hire car charges!!! Whats the point in selling these warranties when they are not worth a thing???

Jan b

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tesco :-x

 

My local supermarket is Tesco, I haven't set foot in the place for over a year because they care for nobody except themselves!

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

Hi Sol

I am having exactly the same prob with my porsche boxster and have just had to shell out £1300.00 to get it back on the road and they refuse to cover it under warranty....although it is a warranty issue. Get the FOS involved i am pinning my hopes on them and hoping to get the repairs cost paid back and also over £1000.00 in hire car charges!!! Whats the point in selling these warranties when they are not worth a thing???

Jan b

 

I'd be keen to see what outcome you are able to achieve. Please keep us posted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it does'nt help, but my experience of car warranties is they are not worth the paper they are written on!

You are better off telling the dealer to forget the warranty and ask for some money off the car.

If your spending alot on a car, an inspection is a MUST.

All I ask is to be treated fairly and lawfully.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be interesting to see statistics of the sort of repairs that actually get approved on these useless policies. The fact that they make you pay for a strip down before they turn up and give you the pre-meditated NO is nothing short of criminal. It wouldn't surprise me if the engineers they send out to inspect were in some way incentivised to find reasons to say NO!

 

After my saga with Tesco, they sent me a letter saying they would cancel my policy and give me a full refund......However, since then they have continued to debit my account rather than refund my money!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
it says they changed Antifreeze on the receipt and I checked all levels before leaving the Dealership to make sure. But I am worried that it might not have been changed correctly hence my problem. Head gaskets don't tend to just fail on cars like this.....there is usually a reason!

 

Head gasket failer on these engines is not a common fault. I'd take an educated guess at one of the 4 following reasons for this.

 

1) The coolant systems wasn't correctly bled. (these engines tend to trap bubbles of air in the hoses which could conceivably cause an air lock)

2) Audi specify G12 antifreeze. It's possible that standard antifreeze was used, when mixed with g12 under certain conditions it can turn to a gel which will obviously block the flow of coolant causing overheating. This happened to a friend of mine on his Golf.

3) They anti freeze mix was far too weak... with the cold weather we have been having the water has frozen in the engine.

4) Thermostat failier... however they are designed to fail open so this is unlikely.

 

That said I'd say your best bet is going throu tesco's warrenty. As has already been said Audi will swear it's not their fault, if it wasn't their fault it can't be a pre exsisting condition therefore your warrenty should pay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...