Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • i know your talking rubbish jk   i remember my mum getting a voucher from argos as compensation after taking something back because it was faulty and she had to go back. they gave her car park money aswell. this was when she rang citizens advice and they told her what to do. ive done the same and rang them and thats what they said. but again...dont take my word for it ...ring them yourself and get updated. anyway as that wasnt the subject (and someone else has replied with what i was asking in their first reply with the appropriate law/legislation etc)...i dont see the point in you going off into a different direction and saying citizens advice is wrong as i doubt you know better than them.
    • Their 33 days were up today at 4pm...
    • It may be that they are applying to try to stop it being struck out and then having to pay for it back in and costing more time. They may also just think it has/will be struck out so they are applying to speed things up after that. seems like a timesaving exercise to me but they are also technically wasting money so I wouldn't bother. The only problem is that the judge will likely see their application when he/she reviews the file so you may find that nothing happens in terms of strikeout/in and it stays the same. Go with what the court have told you unless you hear something else. Please do not not go because you think the court will strike it out not worth the risk!   
    • A defendant still gets the 33 days if they have acknowledged a claim irrespective of not submitting a defence...unlike a default judgment.
    • also if i took someone or company to court then your saying i cant claim compensation for my petrol time or and other expenses?    
  • 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
×
×
  • Create New...