Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Mackenzie Hall & NEXT

Guest alderney1965dk
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5447 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

Guest alderney1965dk

Hi all


I received a letter from Mackenzie hall this morning phishing to see if I was at my address as I had moved in the last 2 years, they said it was for a debt I owed to Next, I told them that the unacknowledged debt was in dispute with Debt Managers, Robinson Way and Next, they stated that why did I pay Meritforce £35.00 previously (2 years ago) I told them that at that time I had not seeken legal advice, mainly this website, I did not mention it however. They said that because I had paid £35.00 previously then I could not have a CCA, I told them I could (Was I right) I understand that he may have been right. I also told him at the end of the call all future correspondence should be in writing only, he said so you are refusing telephone calls, I said yes, did I do right there?


I am now sending a letter, can anyone advise as to whether this letter is okay to send them;


Dear Sir/Madam,





I refer to my recent correspondence with your company concerning an alleged debt. I note with incredulity that you are still sending me letters in relation to this alleged debt. As Next have failed to comply with my Consumer Credit Act request and Debt Mangers admitted on the 5th May 2009, that they have closed the account due to not being able to pursue the signed agreement and you have stated the alleged signed executed agreement may be unavailable, enforcement action is impossible under section 127 (3) of the Act.


This account is unenforceable at law and it is now my intention to refer this matter to the enforcement authorities.


If you or Next makes any further contact regarding the alleged account I will initiate legal action and file reports with the appropriate authorities, including, but not limited to, Trading Standards, Office of Fair Trading, Information Commissioners Office, Financial Ombudsman Service and possible court action. It is also my belief that your continued pursuance of this matter constitutes an offence under Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970.


Failure to respond favourably to this letter within fourteen (14) days of receipt will result in immediate litigation being commenced against your company without further notice. To explicate; I require that you cease ALL activity corresponding to the alleged account immediately. I also require a copy of your internal complaints procedure as further action may be necessary.


If you do not understand any of the contents of this letter you should consult a qualified solicitor


I look forward to hearing from you in writing.


Sorry the post is a long one but I need some info before I fire it off



Link to post
Share on other sites

If Debt Managers and/or Robinson Way faled to respond to a CCA request they had no right to pass the matter onto MHall. This should be enough to get them off your back. Writing to them and telling them in simple terms this should be enough. If they don't your next letter would be to the OFT pointing out their misdemeanours.


Did you pay mritfarce £35?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest alderney1965dk

Yes I paid them £35, but that was in 2007/08 and well before i realised I could have a copy of the CCA, hence when I found this website I have gone to it on all occasions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...