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

DVLA SORN mess on separate cars from nearly 2 years ago.


cheapo
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5318 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

This is pretty depressing. :(

 

The DVLA have been hassling me over two cars that I haven't owned for 18+ months. Yes, they did start writing to me much earlier this year, and I may or may not have had some SORN reminders even though I sold one and scrapped the other. But I've been too blimmin depressed during the last 12 months or so to deal with their nonsense.

 

Today, I have a letter from some collection agency/bailiffs, reference one of the cars, even though DVLA haven't taken me to court. Are they allowed to do that?

 

One car was sold with a broken engine to some guy from a car club/forum that I'm a member of, but I cannot for the life of me remember who. And the other, which the latest bailiff's letter is about, went to a local scrapyard.

 

I did all the right stuff. Posted the relevant documents on both occasions, and even filled in the V5C in front of the scrap guy.

 

I'm writing to DVLA again to tell them it was scrapped, just in case they lost my first letter. :rolleyes:

 

DVLA did eventually accept that I had sold the other one but still insist on having £80.

 

Why is it my fault?

 

*&%^$")£?}+=-@¬`/ to it!

 

I've only just restarted working recently and could do with out these kind of worries.

 

And did I also mention AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!! ?

 

 

Pete. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

(1) Doesn;t matter WHO the owner is. The RK remains responsible to ensure the paperwork is correct and complies with the current burdens of renewal of VED, SORN, Export or scrapping.

(2) There is no requirement to take you to court. Is it easier for them to state the debt and instruct bailiffs - in exactly the same way council do in the case of unpaid Council Tax and the like.

(3) The scrappie would have given you a receipt for the car - if you still have this this will confirm to the DVLA the car was disposed of. Also check with the yard to see why the DVLA say it wasn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...