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

Good Afternoon me and my debts


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5439 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 153
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Devious gits, ignore them.

 

They are being way too presumptuous in hinting at possible legal action, without that CCA it's never going to happen. So why put yourself out and furnish them with anything for a court case that may never see the light of day?

 

Another one for the ignore pile. :rolleyes:

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Dear Sir/Madam (they have my name at the top of the page but cannot decide the gender apparently - sorry I digress)

Dear Sir/Madam

Further to previous letters sent by Marlin Financial Services asking you to contact them in relation to the above debt, they regret they have not heard from you and have now passed this matter to us for potential (= unlikely) legal action.

Our client is now considering (really?:rolleyes:) serving a statutory demand on you to recover the above debt within 21 days on terms satisfactory to our client, a bankruptcy petition may (yawn!) be presented to a court in commencement of bankruptcy proceedings against you.

The consequence of bankruptcy proceedings could be that you are made bankrupt, from which time the Official Receiver could take control of your property and assets in order to sell them to pay your creditors (and we would have no say in how much we receive, oh damn, shot ourselves in the foot there). This can (but probably won't) include taking your car, television, Hi-Fi, mobile phone, bank savings and other financial assets and other items not essential to basic living.

Being made bankrupt could (another yawn) also likely result in you having difficulty in obtaining credit, including anyone you have a credit card or overdraft with possibly withdrawing those facilities (whatever!).

Further information is available at the website below:

hhp://www.insolvency.gov.org.uk

You must contact Marlin Financial Services immediately (now, where's the bin) to discuss a payment proposal to avoid a statutory demand being served on you. Please contact Marlin etc etc etc.

 

The thing is guys, I have a letter sent from them (Marlin Financial Services) to me dated 3rd December 2008 that states;

We refer to the above matter and in particular your recent letter received in our office dated 28th November 2008, your comments have been noted. (thats my CCA request complete with £1 PO)

We do not currently hold a copy of your agreement however we have applied to XYZ Bank for a copy and we will forward this on to you upon receipt.

 

That was the last I heard until today's letter. Presumably they had my £1. PO as well.

 

Any points please on how to respond, must say I feel a little angry at the threats and implied consequences.

 

I would also consider a complaint to the law society, assuming these are REAL solicitors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

You should also try and phone the person named on the SD (Andy Bartle probably) and make a note of all the times you have tried (and failed) and add that to your set aside, if you can't contact the person named it is reason for set aside. Mr Bartle thinks its beneath him to talk to debtors :rolleyes:

 

If by some miraculous reason they put you through all you need to say is you have received the SD and you are preparing to have it set aside with costs, don't be drawn into any other conversation, in fact once you have said those words just hang up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right OK is the SD from Cabot or Lowell? The usual contact name for Lowell was Bartle so either they have changed the contact name or I am guessing its from Cabot? Either way make an attempt at contacting the named person and if you can't speak to them make a note of time/date of attempt and try a number of times and add it to your set aside comments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello 50p, the SD is from Mortimer Clarke Solicitors (Richard Mathias) representing Phoenix/Marlin/Potomac. They have used all 3 names in correspondence but now all 3 appear together in the S.D.

 

Well same advice applies, try and contact them, if you can't get through mention it in the set aside and if you do get through don't get involved in a conversation just hang up. You don't have to worry about being polite to these people, just say you are having the SD set aside and you are going to pay my costs for doing so, goodbye!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sir thank you, I guess it's a learning curve and I am grateful. My worry and concern is that I make a frivolous attempt at defending myself and it gets thrown out.

I have copied a letter suggested by Scab Hunter and modified it to suit the name of the DCA pushing me. I will copy that on to the 6.5 form and would like to take it to the Derby court house on Monday.

Still not sure about calling the solicitor at Marlin though. Wil think it over on Sunday, maybe 42Man will offer a word of advice as well.

Again many thanks.

 

You don't have anything to fear about calling them, they probably won't put you through but if they do just keep it brief (write down what you have to say if necessary), don't let them say a word and hang up as soon as you have finished what you are saying. The purpose of phoning them is not to actually speak to them its to prove you can't actually get through to the person named on the SD, a reason for set aside. In fact if they do put you through you can just ask if the person you are speaking to is Richard Mathias and if it is you can hang up at least you have proven one way or another whether you can contact them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...