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
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5499 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

the bailiffs can only levy on goods BELONGING to you personally,if you have say a grown up child at home who owns a car and parks it outside, if the bailiff says they will levy it, tell them it does not belong to you and if they remove it , it has been removed unlawfully, and the owner will contact the police as this is theft, if nothing in the property belongs to youi.e. your partner has all the goods in their name these too cannot be touched nor can any thing on 'tick', this is provided the bill is in your name only.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Worse than that! They took a levy on a vehicle not even outside my property but a neighbours. I believe they knocked at the wrong house twice!

 

They insist I had 2 visits. State this car was parked at the front of the house in front of garage. did not speak to anyone - no one home and left letters. Then they called again and this time left the levy. Problem is the first attending bailiff was obviously knocking at a neighbours - who owns the car. Wrote the number down to take as a levy. The second bailiff had a headed piece of paper faxed over to him with all the charges already added titled Notice of Distress and dated April 1st. The bailiff just adds the registration number down and the date he called and slips it through the letterbox.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I live in an upstairs flat so they can't get hold of any garden furniture of anything like that, and I can't drive so they can't have levied on a car !

 

Dammit I think they must have tried to levy on my luxury yacht... either that or the flying unicorn I whizz about the place on ;)

 

Hey ho. Once more unto the fray!!!

Edited by AppleCrumble

Apple x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heres my last one.

if it's on letter you receive - in the UK it means you can not present that letter as evidence at court, however the sender can do so if she/he wishes.Flying unicorns- broomsticks -Tawnyowl worried-theres something of the night about this.Tawnyowl.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was on a letterhead that was photocopied or faxed over to the bailiff for him to put his squiggle. Hard life, just drive by and sneak it through the letterbox! Oh and by the way charge you £181.85 for the privelege. Trying to prove their report is a load of tosh now!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heres my last one.

if it's on letter you receive - in the UK it means you can not present that letter as evidence at court, however the sender can do so if she/he wishes.Flying unicorns- broomsticks -Tawnyowl worried-theres something of the night about this.Tawnyowl.

 

Oh that's good, they don't believe in their fees enough to want to stand up to defend them then?

 

Ah okay. Guess they are going to give them back to me :)

Apple x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sent them a sworn certification for the bailiff to sign, but they refused on the basis that the bailiff had not met anyone in person and given them the letter.

 

Also said I should have had the list of charges, but I haven't.

 

Had the cheek to say the account is not on hold! You have to make payments and it won't stop any further action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently they have confirmed to the court that no checks with DVLA have been carried out! BUT, been told the judge is not looking at the charges and have to do a form 8. Surely if the levy is unlawful then the charges become irrelevant? You can't say the levy was unlawful but the charges stand!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently they have confirmed to the court that no checks with DVLA have been carried out! BUT, been told the judge is not looking at the charges and have to do a form 8. Surely if the levy is unlawful then the charges become irrelevant? You can't say the levy was unlawful but the charges stand!

 

 

well my daughter had 2 unlawful levies and charges for both including van fees were removed

k1mmie have you got your own thread going for this been looking cant find it

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...