Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • if the agreement was taken out jan 23, then she has not reached the 1/3rd mark so the car has not become protected goods under the consumer credit act.  this puts her in a very very vulnerable position regarding ever keeping the car....whereby once they have issued a default notice they can legally send a guy with a flatbed (though they are NOT BAILIFFS and have ZERO legal powers) to collect the car.  if the car is kept on the public highway then they can simply take it away and she will legally owe the whole stated amount on the agreement AND lose the car. if it's on private property i'e like a driveway, ok they shouldn't take it without her agreeing, but if they do, it's not really on but its better than a court case and an inevitable loss with the granting a return of goods order. are these 'health reasons' likely to resolve themselves in the very short term (like a couple of months?) and can she immediately begin working again ? i'e has she got a job or would have to find one?  answer the above and we'll try and help. but she looks to be between rock and a hard place . whatever happens she will still have to pay the loan off...car or no car....unless you can appeal to the finance company's better nature using health reasons to back off for xxx months.
    • no need to use it. it doubles the size of the thread and makes it very diff to find replies on small screens too. just like @username it - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread already inc you ...gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.
    • Hello all,   I ordered a laptop online about 16 months ago. The laptop was faulty and I was supposed to send it back within guarantee but didn't for various reasons. I contacted the company a few months later and they said they will still fix it for me free of charge but I'd have to pay to send it to them and they will pay to send it back to me. The parcel arrived there fine. Company had fixed it and they sent it via dpd. I was working in the office so I asked my neighbours who would be in, as there's been a history of parcel thefts on our street. I had 2 neighbours who offered but when I went to update delivery instructions, their door number wasn't on the drop down despite sharing the same post code.  I then selected a neighbour who I thought would likely be in and also selected other in the safe place selection and put the number of the neighbour who I knew would definitely be in and they left my parcel outside and the parcel was stolen. DPD didn't want to deal with me and said I need to speak to the retailer. The retailer said DPD have special instructions from them not to leave a parcel outside unless specified by a customer. The retailer then said they could see my instructions said leave in a safe space but I have no porch. My front door just opens onto the road and the driver made no attempt to conceal it.  Anyway, I would like to know if I have rights here because the delivery wasn't for an item that I just bought. It was initially delivered but stopped working within the warranty period and they agreed to fix it for free.  Appreciate your help 🙏🏼   Thanks!
  • 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

Rankine in the Court of Appeal??????


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5411 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

There is a Matrix conference in leeds this afternoon which a pal is attending out of curiosity to do with selling the debt.

 

Basil Rankine is the star turn and is apparantly the most qualified and eminent person in the land regarding CCA. I've asked my pal to ask him if he appealed the decision etc. I'll let you know what he says....................:p

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

There is a Matrix conference in leeds this afternoon which a pal is attending out of curiosity to do with selling the debt.

 

Basil Rankine is the star turn and is apparantly the most qualified and eminent person in the land regarding CCA. I've asked my pal to ask him if he appealed the decision etc. I'll let you know what he says....................:p

 

You know - the gall of that man never cease to amaze me - I'll be interested to know what he says...

If I've helped feel free to add to my reputation.

 

I am not a Practising Lawyer. My comments are my opinion only. You should not rely upon those comments and should always take your own professional advice from a practising Solicitor or Barrister

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

yes but that still leaves the $64 million dollar question which is :-

 

Did Rankines appeal the High Court decision on the Amex Judgement..? There are credible rumours that they did but so far no concrete evidence ... Anyone ?

Edited by shakespeare62

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law and litigation privilege

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

they did launch an application as i understand it.

 

how far that got, i really do not know but i will do my utmost to find out through my CoA sources that i have on the grapevine

Link to post
Share on other sites

they did launch an application as i understand it.

 

how far that got, i really do not know but i will do my utmost to find out through my CoA sources that i have on the grapevine

 

I've been that there is something on casetrack but unfortunately I don't have access to it - I don't know if you have PT

If I've helped feel free to add to my reputation.

 

I am not a Practising Lawyer. My comments are my opinion only. You should not rely upon those comments and should always take your own professional advice from a practising Solicitor or Barrister

Link to post
Share on other sites

From Casetrack:

 

Rankine & Anor v American Express Services Europe Ltd & Ors (2009)

Moore-Bick LJ

Case No: A3/08/2236 Date: 28/04/2009

 

 

Outcome: Application Dismissed

 

 

Judgment Status: Given

Transcript Status: Initial

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

From Casetrack:

 

Rankine & Anor v American Express Services Europe Ltd & Ors (2009)

Moore-Bick LJ

Case No: A3/08/2236 Date: 28/04/2009

 

 

Outcome: Application Dismissed

 

 

Judgment Status: Given

Transcript Status: Initial

cheers Sequenci:)
Link to post
Share on other sites

From Casetrack:

 

Rankine & Anor v American Express Services Europe Ltd & Ors (2009)

Moore-Bick LJ

Case No: A3/08/2236 Date: 28/04/2009

 

 

Outcome: Application Dismissed

 

 

Judgment Status: Given

Transcript Status: Initial

 

Thanks for finding us that.

 

Presumably at some point there'll be a transcript available.

 

We'll have to keep our eyes open

  • Haha 1

If I've helped feel free to add to my reputation.

 

I am not a Practising Lawyer. My comments are my opinion only. You should not rely upon those comments and should always take your own professional advice from a practising Solicitor or Barrister

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just A Quick Note As This Is Ivegotnomoney Thread

 

Some Of You Know I Helped A Pal In Court This Week Against Arrow/marlin

 

Marlin Responded To A Cca Request With Bog Off Rankin Judgement

 

Judge Took One Look At It And Said

 

Aahh Rankin,

 

The Less Said About That The Better

 

And Marlin Had A Legal Obligation To Give The Agreement In The Allowed Time Frame

 

Game Over For Arrow/marlin

 

Point Being

 

Judges Know Of Dca And The Rankin Excuse And Treat Dca With Contempt For Using It

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just A Quick Note As This Is Ivegotnomoney Thread

 

Some Of You Know I Helped A Pal In Court This Week Against Arrow/marlin

 

Marlin Responded To A Cca Request With Bog Off Rankin Judgement

 

Judge Took One Look At It And Said

 

Aahh Rankin,

 

The Less Said About That The Better

 

And Marlin Had A Legal Obligation To Give The Agreement In The Allowed Time Frame

 

Game Over For Arrow/marlin

 

Point Being

 

Judges Know Of Dca And The Rankin Excuse And Treat Dca With Contempt For Using It

 

That is excellent news - we just need to make sure that wheneverthey raise Rankine we are able to deal with...

If I've helped feel free to add to my reputation.

 

I am not a Practising Lawyer. My comments are my opinion only. You should not rely upon those comments and should always take your own professional advice from a practising Solicitor or Barrister

Link to post
Share on other sites

"The less said about that, the better"

 

I concluded that the Judge had done his homework about the 'Rankines', with assistance of the Recorder of course.

 

Judges are used to dealing with people and he saw right through them;

the Rankines are not akin to the general consumer;

they were running a website and posting ads in the free papers.

 

AC

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing that annoys me is the amount of stress and hassle the Rankines have caused us all...

If I've helped feel free to add to my reputation.

 

I am not a Practising Lawyer. My comments are my opinion only. You should not rely upon those comments and should always take your own professional advice from a practising Solicitor or Barrister

Link to post
Share on other sites

About time too!

 

Hear Hear - there is a god after all

If I've helped feel free to add to my reputation.

 

I am not a Practising Lawyer. My comments are my opinion only. You should not rely upon those comments and should always take your own professional advice from a practising Solicitor or Barrister

Link to post
Share on other sites

Time will now tell if the financial industry will still use there case as a president.

 

PF

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats interesting, Momentum Network authorisation cancelled after the recent warnng from the OFT.

 

The strange thing is that Matrix Financial Group PLC who appear to offer the same debt purchase scheme are still authorised. They have been mentioned often on these threads.

 

What a difference a day makes I suppose.

 

I will check again tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The strange thing is that Matrix Financial Group PLC who appear to offer the same debt purchase scheme are still authorised.

 

 

The text book "An Outline of the Law of Contract" by GH Treitel says " Assignment is the transfer of a right without the consent of the debtor. The Law does not recognise any converse process by which a liability can be transferred without the consent of the creditor" Treitel cites the House of Lords case of Linden Gardens Trust Ltd v Lenesta Sludge Disposals Ltd [1994] 1 AC 85 at 103 as authority for that proposition

If I've helped feel free to add to my reputation.

 

I am not a Practising Lawyer. My comments are my opinion only. You should not rely upon those comments and should always take your own professional advice from a practising Solicitor or Barrister

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...