Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

uptoeyeballs v American Express credit card CCA


uptoeyeballs
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4945 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

Nothing from the court as yet. I know it's not been long, but the suspense...

 

Amex have sent a SAR follow up with a default notice template with the 14 day wording which would have beem good enough when it was 7 days after service.

 

It could be a mistake/fob off or they are trying to set me up. I suspect the latter.

 

So, I'm hunting for an early 2005 default notice. If anyone has posted/spotted one a link would be appreciated. Will obviously ask permission to use in court if the need arises.

 

uteb

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 113
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hello UTEB!

 

I think in 2005, they may have been using the wording payment within 10 calendar days from the date of this Notice. So, if they are saying they said 14 days, they are almost certainly lying.

 

The 10 days is a PITA, but it's invalid, because it does not allow 7 clear days even when Posted 1st Class on a Working Monday:

 

Monday

Tuesday = Amex Day 1

Wednesday

Thursday = Amex Day 3 - 1st Clear Day

Friday = Amex Day 4 - 2nd Clear Day

Saturday = Amex Day 5 - 3rd Clear Day

Sunday = Amex Day 6 - 4th Clear Day

Monday = Amex Day 7 - 5th Clear Day

Tuesday = Amex Day 8 - 6th Clear Day

Wednesday = Amex Day 9 - 7th Clear Day

Thursday = = Amex Day 10 Payment within this

 

Thus, Parliament demands that you are given 7 clear days from Service, so the earliest deadline they can set would be the last Thursday above. Whereas they want payment within 10 calendar days, so Parliament says you must pay by the last Thursday, whereas they want payment within ten calendar days, so that would suggest Wednesday before, although in this extreme example where every single factor is in their favour, it's right on the borderline.

 

So, the real killer for them is class of Postage, date of the Notice, and the day they Posted.

 

They like to Date their Notices on Sundays, so that would sink them, because it would bring their deadline further into the clear days that Parliament demands you must be given.

 

Likewise, if they cannot prove 1st Class, then add at least +2 working days to the Postage (i.e. more if a weekend follows straight after Postage), and that sinks them, because their own Deadline is then moved still further into the clear days that Parliament demands you must have.

 

Finally, if they Posted on, say, a Friday, then even 1st Class has the weekend added to the Postage, so this rats it up for them even further.

 

OK, get onto Google, and hunt out a late 2005 or early 2006 Arsemex DN to show what wording they were using.

 

HTH

 

Cheers,

BRW

Edited by banker_rhymes_with
Typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

The 10 days is a PITA

Cheers BRW!

 

Not found a default notice from the right period as yet, but I like this from Rankine:

The default notice was sent under cover of a letter dated 18 January 2005. It. was stated to enclose a default notice and required rectification of the situation within 10 days. It stated the current balance to be £5,978.66, arrears to be £347.00 and credit limit £5,800.00.The default notice under the heading “Description of the breach” set out the figures as in the previous paragraph and went on to say:

 

Now where's my 2005 calandar.....

 

uteb

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so the dates look like this:

 

Wednesday

Thursday = Amex Day 1

Friday

Saturday = Amex Day 3 - 1st Clear Day

Sunday = Amex Day 4 - 2nd Clear Day

Monday = Amex Day 5 - 3rd Clear Day

Tuesday = Amex Day 6 - 4th Clear Day

Wednesday = Amex Day 7 - 5th Clear Day

Thursday = Amex Day - 6th Clear Day

Friday = Amex Day 9 - 7th Clear Day

Saturday = Amex Day 10 Payment within this

Sunday = Amex Day 11 - 9th Clear Day

Monday = Amex Day 12 - 10th Clear Day

Tuesday

 

So, I think, unless it was 2nd class it's ok.

 

It does show that the template is not the correct one though.

 

uteb.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hello!

 

No long until my set aside application hearing. Not having done this before I'm unsure of what will happen.

 

I think:

- I check with the court a few days before to make sure nothing has changed

- I don't do anything else before the hearing

- I turn up with 3 copies of the application, WS, exhibits and case law

- at the hearing I explain why I did not originally defend, the delay and set out my defence. Basically what is in my WS.

 

Is that right?

 

Thanks.

 

uteb

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi all,

 

Didn't get what I wanted and took the hit on costs, but actually, I don't feel that bad about it and the judge and other side were quite reasonable.

 

I had originally started this as a set aside, but it became apparent after the N1 was was submitted that was not the way to go.

 

I learnt a lot from that short visit to the court. Having never been in a court I had little idea what to expect.

 

So onto the useful stuff to share.....

 

The judge confirmed I could not set aside a judgment under admission.

 

He was receptive to CPR 14 and although I had prepared well what would be my defence I hadn't put much effort into CPR 14, although I think it unlikely I would have got a different outcome.

 

Under CPR 14 information you have only just got hold of, but could have had if you sought it at the time of the original claim do not count as new evidence.

 

Under CPR 14 the fact that someone gave you bad advice doesn't help. Your recourse is back to person/company that gave you that advice.

 

Amex kindly offered some information on their skeleton argument (which suggests they thought a withdrawal of admission possible) and apart from the usual Rankine/Carey there were 2 I've never heard of and cannot find on the forum, although they also kindly provided hard copies of these. Amex v Brandon and Amex v Harrison.

 

I'm going to read up on these as from a quick skim they seem to be concerned with a blank back being acceptable.

 

Off for now, be back if I find anything useful.

 

uteb

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to hear this, uteb, but you seem quite positive about the outcome.

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank 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.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im lead to believe that Amex v Brandon is going to Court of Appeal? Can anyone shed any light on this?

My Posts exist exclusively to assist me in preparing litigation against another party.

As such, it is almost certainly protected by litigation privilege.

 

The legal requirements for claiming litigation privilege are well established and are not in dispute.

Communication between a solicitor, or the client, or a third party will be protected by litigation privilege where the communications are for the dominent purpose of obtaining legal advice in connection with, or conducting litigation in prospect: Re: "Highgate Traders Limited (1984)"BCLC 151.

 

Copyright Information: All information contained in this website , Associated websites, and Forum posts are Copyright "Reclaim The Right Ltd". If you wish to use the information on this site for publication elsewhere then please email the administrator for permission.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im lead to believe that Amex v Brandon is going to Court of Appeal? Can anyone shed any light on this?

 

The document I have says the appeal was dismissed on 25/5/10.

 

I need to get some time to read these properly because I think it will help others.

 

Brandon was in the High Court, but Harrison looks like County.

 

Of course, if someone already knows these cases maybe they could comment....

Link to post
Share on other sites

The document I have says the appeal was dismissed on 25/5/10.

 

I need to get some time to read these properly because I think it will help others.

 

Brandon was in the High Court, but Harrison looks like County.

 

Of course, if someone already knows these cases maybe they could comment....

 

The 25th May decision was the High Court sitting at a County Court, I thought that it was now being taken to the Court of Appeal subsequent to that decision.

My Posts exist exclusively to assist me in preparing litigation against another party.

As such, it is almost certainly protected by litigation privilege.

 

The legal requirements for claiming litigation privilege are well established and are not in dispute.

Communication between a solicitor, or the client, or a third party will be protected by litigation privilege where the communications are for the dominent purpose of obtaining legal advice in connection with, or conducting litigation in prospect: Re: "Highgate Traders Limited (1984)"BCLC 151.

 

Copyright Information: All information contained in this website , Associated websites, and Forum posts are Copyright "Reclaim The Right Ltd". If you wish to use the information on this site for publication elsewhere then please email the administrator for permission.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...