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

monkey_uk -v- HSBC CCA for g/f


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5421 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

Thats the trouble when you start to take this route, :D

At the end of the day knowledge is power.

The only way to get this power is reading, reading, reading. then trying to fathom out what you've read.

I've spent hours and hours here at CAG and often I should have been doing something else. Its a self help site and the info you can gain is amazing, really its all here.

I've not even found the time to enter the Beer Garden yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 1 month later...

If you send a SAR it costs you £10. they have 42 days to respond and they should send you everything, unfortunately they will often send you just statements, other bits and pieces BUT not the all important agreement

The way to get sight of the CCA is the way you have started, CPR 31.16.

 

As you have already sent the CPR 31.16 letter if after 21 days they have not sent the agreement you send the reminder letter, found in the CPR31.16 thread here....

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/173201-why-you-shouldnt-use.htm

 

the reply you received from the OS said they could not locate it at the moment and it seems like they have replied as if it was a CCA request, which it wasn't.

The second letter (from the Pt's thread linked above) is your next step, you could amend it slightly to say your letter was not a sec.78 CCA request but a CPR 31.16 request.

what they mean by ""However, if required to do so to enforce the agreement we are willing to provide other evicdence that there is a credit agreement and that both parties have serviced that agreement." ??? is that they would show statements to show an account existed, this reply is talking about enforcing the agreement which they need to have, along with proof the account was serviced, it has nothing to do with your CPR letter. The 31.16 letter is for disclosure so that you can get the original document to see if it was compliant with the legislation,

Their letter was just trying to fob you off, they probably don't have the agreement so you need to follow the advise in Pt's thread above, the proceedure is set out at the beginning of the thread and SMT's thread gives a brilliant account of his experience so far in his CPR31.16 request and what happened after he sent the N244 application to the court for disclosure ........His thread is here....http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/165349-smt37-morgan-stanley-goldfish.html

Edited by questioning
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Johnny,

Monkey UK has started the CPR 31.16 procedure with the first letter already sent,

 

Hi badboybill,

I wish I had known what you knew 10 years ago, even 5 years ago.

Your experience will be most helpful and welcome at CAG.

cheers Q.x.

Edited by questioning
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Q,x I should have noticed that ......... :oops: . Senior Moment :eek:

and thanks also for the smt link - I'll read that at my leisure .....

 

Hey Johhny, I know the feeling, I've just given a "poor eyesight" posting on R and b's thread. My eyesight is getting real bad with middle age.

All thats left to say is, we must laugh at these moments, thats what I do anyway.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...