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

Moorcroft and their fees?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5465 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

Maybe I am missing something here, but I don't know.

 

After opening my mail with mis-spelt address in a lovely yellow envelope, I am filled with dread as it comes from their Pre-Court Division. scared0006.gif This is made worse because it also says NOTICE OF INTENDED LITIGATION

Oh no!!!! scared0008.gif;)

 

Anyway, their fees don't make any sense to me.

 

Balance £14X.XX

 

Solicitors costs for issue of claim form £50.00. What? Wouldn't you have to errrr, win, then ask for this?

 

Court fees for issue of Claim Form £20.00 ???? Not £30 then?

 

Solicitors Costs for Entering Judgement (by default) £25.00. Oh please, residents of la-la land.

 

It's all irrelevant because they won't take it to court, and I couldn't give a shiny one if they did. But they've a cheek with these 'scary' designed to induce panic - look how much money you can save bullcr*p letters.

 

What a bunch of self-involved chimps with delusions of adequacy (I nabbed that from someone here, lol)

 

I love the nugget at the bottom of the letter - 'please note we have confirmed with a major public utility that you are in occupancy at the above address (the one they couldn't spell right) Well, no s**t Sherlock, that's whose debt it is.

 

Cheque for £30 sent to utility - I hope they don't give it to Moorcroft - heaven forbid. Btw, my electric jumped up from £6 a week when I moved here to £25 a week! Now I'm with Scottish Power it's less than £6 a week. It's only a diddy flat, above utility company knows full well I am in major dispute with that huge 6 week bill. :mad: They'll get it in dribs and drabs I suppose, but Moorcroft are getting nothing of me, directly at least.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to butt in but have been searching for advice on this very topic. I too have received this morning a shiny yellow letter, despite requesting a subject access request from Moorcroft last week. They have not responded to that letter. This is all getting on top of me folks. Really, really don't know where to turn next. Can anyone help?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi rapunzel1 , its always best to start your own thread that way the info put forward can not be mistaken for your answers, from the little knowledge that I have gleemed from other caggers I think that you should SAR the OC and only CCA the debt collection firm, and you have to allow 40 days for a SAR, also moorcroft tend to post letters that appear to be more serious then the last then generally give up so don't worry to much about their colourful letters.

sleepingdog

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much for coming to my aid Sleeping Dog, and sorry for posting in the wrong place, I am very new here. Unfortunately I think I've dealt with everything wrongly. I CCA'd the original creditor, who had an enforceable agreement. I then tried to negotiate a repayment programme with them and asked for an expenditure sheet. They said they would forward one to me, the next thing I receive is a nasty letter from Moorcroft saying they were acting on behalf of the original creditor.

 

As I had not received any notification from my original creditor that they'd passed the debt on, I subject access requested Moorcroft. OMG really don't know what I'm doing, do I? Help!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanx. I really am worried sick. Should I send them another letter asking them to respond to my sar or sit tight and wait to see what happens next? (might just have some stumps where my fingers were by then) :oops:

Link to post
Share on other sites

then they give up eventually

 

You mean to say thier fun laters will dry up?, damn. :p:D Maybe they'll track down my moby and record the call for 'quality purposes'. Guffaw :D

 

Rapunzel1, do start your own thread so you can get advice directly on your issue - it will be clearer and more helpful for you.

 

You will soon learn they are powerless cheats relying on fear. :) Stick around and you'll see.

 

Click here and then click newthread.gif fill out the title and off you go.

 

Don't let these morons make you worry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...