Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 1st try for snotty letter.     lbccc v1.pdf
    • I do feel now that I would like to comment on some points raised on some of the posts on this feed:   Although I found the appearance and comments from Zac to be rather strange, I have not left a scathing review; I was merely seeking some advice as I have never been in this situation before and did not know what to do.   The information I have provided is factual, transparent, and comprehensive. The pdf I posted of full correspondence, screenshots with text on (and to clarify direct quotations from the video walk round), and photographs of the bonnet show this.   The emails and comments posted by the dealer do not constitute the full facts of the situation as he stated, and it makes me feel sick that I have repeatedly been called a bully and a blackmailer (via correspondence and forum comments) throughout this. Additionally, the 4th email posted by the dealer which he named as the response to the email above it was not the response I received to it.   I have made it clear from the start that I wish to keep the car and only wanted it in the condition as advertised. Upon receipt of my first email concerning my complaint (not the best email, I know), it was very clear that the dealer wanted the car back. His response to this was a WhatsApp message which ended in “To be frank I don’t want to sell some one a car that insults and then blackmails me”. This was also the only option provided which would not cost me considerable time or expense. Although it would still have left me without a car (and having to resume my search), as my old Golf was due to be collected by a private buyer. Also, this was the only option offered without sarcastic and/or patronising comments attached. This is of course only my personal opinion and I am aware that I may not be fully objective on this point, but I felt bullied into doing what the dealer wanted.   Whilst I understand my initial email was quite conflict orientated, and that I have not dealt with this situation well, I don’t believe it excuses the responses I received. I am at a loss to see how this is above and beyond in terms of customer service.   As the dealer pointed out, I did state that the car was in fantastic condition for its year (the interior is fantastic for the year), apart from the bonnet of course. The car has most likely done predominately motorway miles which would account for the bonnet. There are minor issues which also don’t match up with the video walk round. Namely, a tiny dent in the rear wheel arch, which is barely even noticeable, several paint chips around one of the doors, the odd stone chip elsewhere, the alloy wheels are in good condition, but not absolutely pristine as most were described as (I had assumed maybe these has been reconditioned), the rear loading strip is heavily marked all the way across, but the paintwork not affected. However, all of these I feel are minor in a 10 year old car. Upon reflection ‘great’ may have been a better representation than ‘fantastic' on my comment.   During my initial phone complaint, I was told that I was the first customer to complain in over 50 cars (can’t recall the exact number but remember it being in the 50’s) to which I said that I felt bad about, later it was 300…   I never asked for £150. As mentioned before, I accepted this offer over the phone after the dealer had told me that I would not be able to get a stone chip repair company to rectify, as “there are hundreds,” and that it would need respraying. He told me that it would cost him £150 (did not mention plus V.A.T) and that it might cost me £200 here.   I was confused by the pricing structure mentioned (from the chap he has previously told me he has used for his body work repairs for years) as this appeared to be an invoice, which I assumed was for another car’s repairs. The total cost was over £1,000. It stated £180 for a bonnet repair and paint (vandal damage, small repair or paint correction) and on the second page V.A.T was added. If this is correct this would surely equate to a total cost of £216 for the bonnet, but of course I could be wrong. Not inclusive of the cost of collecting and delivering the car back to me, as I have been informed that this should not be of inconvenience or cost to me.   I asked for a larger contribution as initially I was led to believe it would cost me £50 and a little inconvenience. Only after I stated the specific consumer rights (which I had Googled over the weekend) and sent the dealer photos of the bonnet did he offer me a further £112.50 for this. In hindsight I could have specified a figure, and that I still did not expect the blended wings to be paid for. Before this, the dealer stated that he did not wish to negotiate any further and to take the car back to him to paint or they will refund and collect. Upon seeking more specific advice on Monday I was informed of my full rights in this circumstance.   It is certainly not a case of changing my mind because I wanted a brand new bonnet etc. and I disagree that the dealer kept his "kool" and replied respectfully throughout, as I do not consider sarcastic and derogatory comments throughout as respectful.   The warranty is a 6 month bronze package from Warranty Wise in this case, which I believe is the only option for a car over 100,000 miles.   I’m unsure as to the significance of the dealer counting 14 stone chips, but maybe this was on one of the photos close to the edge of the bonnet. I have not zoomed in, merely taken a photos of different areas of the bonnet. You can gauge the size on the photos which are closer to the front headlight area. Also, again this issue is not about the size of the stone chips, which do vary in size throughout, it is about the sheer amount across the bonnet not being as described. I did state that these were difficult to see in sunlight or at a distance. However, upon reflection I should have stated more clearly i.e. direct sunshine. I believe 2 or 3 were pointed out on the front edge of the bonnet in the video walk round. In which the dealer stated "Body work is absolutely stunning for the year, with only very minor age related marks, which we’ll point out as we walk round… Bonnet; no scratches, no dents, no damage. If we look closely, we might find the odd little stone chip here and there that have been touched in, little one there, very difficult to see. Little one there, look. So, it's got the odd little stone chip on the front of the bonnet edge, apart from that it's very very clean."   There are not over 30 emails about this, there are 12 and 11 WhatsApp messages (inclusive of the 2 photos of the body shop invoice).   From what I understand about mediation, its purpose is to negotiate to resolve an issue as timely and smoothly as possible. The last emails from the dealer stated that they had no choice but to take legal advice and pass all their correspondence to Lawgistics. With a formal retraction of all previous offers except returning the car to them for a refund, which would be my responsibility. This also informed me of the AA ADR. Followed by one stating “My apologies I forgot to include the phone number for the legal team… Bonnie is the team leader should you wish to escalate to the highest level. Please note that on taking further advice we are under no obligation to offer a refund for the vehicle.”   The dealer also stated “our car” at the end of one of his posts which is odd. It is legally my car which was purchased online in good faith.   Bankfodder’s recent comment concerning the AA does indicate he is saying the AA does not know what they are talking about.   Lastly, I am also unsure as to why anyone would want to deliberately add stone chips to their newly purchased car, or indeed how. Is this even possible?
    • As far as I can see I could just have scanned in a QR code of an unused or unreported test and declared it negative.  It is a venue asking for this and it's utterly pointless.  They'd be much better asking everyone to bring an LFT with them and randomly picking 10% out on entry to test in front of a witness
    • Each test has a unique QR code?   The UK is a joke at the moment.  People fighting over petrol at garages, because of supply issues affecting some garages.    Will we see people fighting again in Supermarkets over the last pack of toilet rolls ?   Government are blaming the media for reporting the problems .            
    • Thank you Bankfodder, your knowledge and advice are very valuable.   I have taken the car to a few independent body shops in my area who are all of the same opinion, although I told them what was stated by the dealer, they have not seen the video walk round. So, if necessary, an independent to assess both the car bonnet and the advertisement is very helpful piece of advice. As I stated to the dealer, I was happy to continue to search for a cheaper price. I have since found a couple of body shops who will do the works at a slightly cheaper price.   I have only received advice concerning my Consumer Rights on this, which I sought after correspondence with the dealer. I was informed that this falls under “Public statements such as those in advertising or on labelling, made by the trader, the producer or their representative about the vehicle, must be accurate.” Additionally, that irrespective of initially accepting £150 and rejecting a refund, the remedies must not be of inconvenience to me and must constitute full cost of rectifying the issue. However, I was not aware of how a Court would assess the issue or indeed the rewards process. This has helped me gain a greater perspective from an objective viewpoint.   I have never wanted anything but the car in the condition as described, if I could get the bonnet resprayed leaving it in the condition as advertised I would do so. I have also been told that a colour match can not be guaranteed and advised to blend into the wings. This is a further cost I was not aware of, and do not expect the dealer to pay for this as I thought that only fair. As it turned out my contribution would amount to over £180, when I was led to believe I was going to be contributing £50. I do of course have the option of getting the bonnet sprayed with no blending into the wings, but don’t want this to be glaringly obvious, so currently unsure.   I’m sure many would have just sent the car back. However, on this occasion I had a specific model I was searching for due to reading up on MK6 Golfs (VW Golf 1.4TSI Match) within a certain budget. I was seeking a minimum of two owners (ideally one), full service history, great condition for year and a dealer with great Google reviews. This one was the closest to me I had found, and the video walk round sold it to me straight away. I thought I was just lucky or it was meant to be considering it had been on the market since June.   I have now also arranged to have the car to be checked over next week for peace of mind upon your advice.   Update: I called the AA mediation team first thing Friday morning to accept the extra contribution of £112.50 from the dealer, should this still be on the table. I decided that the time spent and the stress this was causing was too much. I have not heard anything back yet but will keep you posted.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Unenforceability Cases on hold until further notice


sequest
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4355 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 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

There is another point for consideration here too....if the powers that be are anticipating a potential 100,000 + cases to be going before their Courts.....it would seem to dispel the claims and suggestions by credit cleanse and reclaims outfits that they can sort out the process quite easily by filling a few forms in and sending a couple of letters.!!

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

There is another point for consideration here too....if the powers that be are anticipating a potential 100,000 + cases to be going before their Courts.....it would seem to dispel the claims and suggestions by credit cleanse and reclaims outfits that they can sort out the process quite easily by filling a few forms in and sending a couple of letters.!!

 

But what powers? I still think some clarification is needed here. I am under the distinct impression that the judge is seeking a direction based upon the number of these hearings going to appeal?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok lets get on with the discussion in hand-the inappropriate link has now been removed,and an apology made so the matter is closed :)

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

You posted the original post on the judge freezing claims... but the actual ruling was nothing of the sort. In fact the appeal was upheld. Therefore the publishing of the documents contravened your post.

 

If I am wrong I am happy to admit it... but it seems strange to have a go at the poster of what seems to be information that stops the conjecture and actually tells the story of the case.

 

I was having a go at the poster because he put this guys address on the internet for all the world to see.

I can only assume the total embarrasment that may have caused him. It was totally irresponsible. I don't have a problem with the judgment being posted, if it hadn't been sent confidentially, and it didn't have the guys address on.

 

Not sure I understand your first part though. I simply posted a link to the news

Odio los bancos con una venganza

Link to post
Share on other sites

But what powers? I still think some clarification is needed here. I am under the distinct impression that the judge is seeking a direction based upon the number of these hearings going to appeal?

 

There is still a few sketchy points that need clarification-we only know as much as you-hopefully more detailed info will be forthcoming in the next few days....certainly its true to say that theres a lot of people eager to get more info.

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

The way I see it, if Parliament wanted the issue of unenforceability to disappear, then the CCA 2006 wouldn't have left the carve out for s.127(3-5) claims to continue under agreements made under the 1974 Act. This was quite specific, so was obviously debated when the Bill was being put through the HL and Parliament. As a result, I would summarise that the Judges felt that case law should prevail and that consumers that entered into technically incorrect agreements should be protected. The lenders would have tried to insist on the repeal applying to agreements retrospectively, so in the consultation period, this definitely would have been debated.

 

As such, the result was that the Bill was passed without the repeal applying to pre-2006 agreements. Therefore, the case law stands and I doubt that any judge hearing a case would rule against the previous case law, which appears to be fair to the consumer and lender - assuming the lenders bothered to draft the CCA's correctly!

 

This is still the best post on the subject IMO...

 

But hopefully the issue will be clarified and disctrict judges will get the rulings right first time around :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate why the doc has been taken down, but is there any chance it can be reposted without details? I think it would be a good one to keep for when DCa`s say cases have been stayed. I didnt even look at the guys name I was more interested in the judgement!

 

Pleeaassee!

Advice & opinions given by spartathisis are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be happy to repost with Tippex a plenty. But will defer to more senior members for the decision. Moderators?

 

Bloody ell!!!

 

Why don't you first ask the company who sent it to you in confidence if it's OK with them to post it first!!

 

**EDITED**

Edited by car2403
Removing personal insults

Odio los bancos con una venganza

Link to post
Share on other sites

The test cases will no doubt be those which make up the majority of the cases appearing in front of the judges, once decided it makes for an easier process and gives uniformity across the county court system. How many stories are posted up of different judges giving varying judgements even though case law is available.

 

I think it will be good for the consumer in that you should go to any court and get the same judgement if the points are the same. Lets face it there arent that many arguments to put forward as in the main case law already exists and the contracts involved are to be honest simple and relatively short. It will make life easier on us all, i think.

Advice & opinions given by spartathisis are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bloody ell!!!

 

Why don't you first ask the company who sent it to you in confidence if it's OK with them to post it first!!

 

Have you no integrity at all???

 

If everything that had been marked confidential had been kept confidential then the Bank Charges, CCA enforcability etc etc campaign would have have got where we are today, you seem to have a real beef with a few posters on here can I ask that you keep it to yourself because it isnt helping.

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bloody ell!!!

 

Why don't you first ask the company who sent it to you in confidence if it's OK with them to post it first!!

 

**EDITED**

 

Why would he need to? It's now case law and will be on the list for perusal soon enough... anyone can search for it when it is uploaded to the law databases...

 

**EDITED**

Edited by car2403
Removing personal insults
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said Lula.

 

Bobbys error was in not noticing the name and address were still on and removing them. We have enough to put up with without facile comments from fellow caggers.:)

Advice & opinions given by spartathisis are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would he need to? It's now case law and will be on the list for perusal soon enough... anyone can search for it when it is uploaded to the law databases...

 

**EDITED**

 

What's wrong with me is he was sent confidential information. He cares not that the company who sent it ( i ASSUME) has told him it is confidential and to keep it to himself. He decides to plonk it up on the internet for all to see. If I send something to anyone and ask them to kep it confidential, I would like to think they would do just that!!!

 

As, and when, it comes into the public domain, good- everyone can see it for themselves then.

Edited by car2403
Quotes edited posts

Odio los bancos con una venganza

Link to post
Share on other sites

The test cases will no doubt be those which make up the majority of the cases appearing in front of the judges, once decided it makes for an easier process and gives uniformity across the county court system. How many stories are posted up of different judges giving varying judgements even though case law is available.

 

I think it will be good for the consumer in that you should go to any court and get the same judgement if the points are the same. Lets face it there arent that many arguments to put forward as in the main case law already exists and the contracts involved are to be honest simple and relatively short. It will make life easier on us all, i think.

 

Absolutely spot on... this is a good thing and one to be welcomed. It's about time the judges were directed as to the proper procedures for these types of claims and which precedents to refer to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If everything that had been marked confidential had been kept confidential then the Bank Charges, CCA enforcability etc etc campaign would have have got where we are today, you seem to have a real beef with a few posters on here can I ask that you keep it to yourself because it isnt helping.

I don't have a 'beef' with any particular poster. I have an opinion on peoples integrity. Thart is my opinion and I am entitled to that.

 

Please see my above post why I feel that it should not have been posted.

If I kept it to myself, the guys address would still be up here for all to see , and maybe even could have led to CAG being sued, I don't know. But at the moment, I am not having a go, just replying to posters.

Odio los bancos con una venganza

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be happy to repost with Tippex a plenty. But will defer to more senior members for the decision. Moderators?

 

 

As per response in the pm-repost with some edits is fine.

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

Bloody ell!!!

 

Why don't you first ask the company who sent it to you in confidence if it's OK with them to post it first!!

 

**EDITED**

 

The company that sent it to me are currently taking hundreds of pounds upfront off people in the hope that they will have their debts wiped off. They sent it out to thousands of inroducers, I doubt they had the permission of the plaintiff or the defendant so I would be question their integrity not more as they were the one's who leaked it. Jesus wept do you think the Telegraph asked for permission before they published the names and addresses of all those involved in the Mp's expense claims scandal?

Edited by car2403
Quotes edited posts
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. Not quite sure on the face of it what a test case will acheive though? The laws clear already. Whether contract is compliant or not with the CCA is a question of fact dependant on its terms.

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please see my above post why I feel that it should not have been posted.

If I kept it to myself, the guys address would still be up here for all to see , and maybe even could have led to CAG being sued, I don't know. But at the moment, I am not having a go, just replying to posters.

 

In fairness, the Judge himself stated that the judgement was only confidential until formally handed down on 8 April 2009 and we are well past that date.

 

The judgement can be obtained from the court and, as an appeal, will no doubt be available online in the near future. As far as I can tell, it is in the public domain and I see no lawful reason for anyone to sue.

If you feel I've helped then by all means click my star to the left...a simple "thank you" costs nothing! ;)

 

Restons MBNA -v- WelshMam

 

MBNA Cards

 

CitiCard

M&S and More

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. Not quite sure on the face of it what a test case will acheive though? The laws clear already. Whether contract is compliant or not with the CCA is a question of fact dependant on its terms.

 

That's not the case (pardon the pun) GaryH.

 

There is no precedent for breaches of schedule 1 - where the court does have discretion to make an order to enforce.

 

This also applies to post April 2007 agreements, and the restriction of 127(3) doesn't apply - so the courts also have discretion to make that order.

 

What is interesting - is that in the Walker case, the judge specifically stated that the breaches of Schedule 1 alone were enough for the court to refuse to make an order to enforce.

 

up until now, everyone had assumed the court would simply find in favour of the creditor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. Not quite sure on the face of it what a test case will acheive though? The laws clear already. Whether contract is compliant or not with the CCA is a question of fact dependant on its terms.

 

If the law was clear then there wouldn't be any rulings against the claimants... the very fact that this particular case was an appeal (which was then upheld) shows that there is a lack on understanding.

 

It's been said already; there is a direction that will be issued on how to handle these types of claims to ensure that there are fewer appeals going through the system. It makes no sense to the judiciary in having their time wasted in this manner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4355 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...