Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • We need to see the actual document from the IAS where it is written - "The Operator's evidence shows no payment for the Appellant's vehicle, or anything similar. It does show two payments for the same registration in quick succession. I would take a reasonable guess, based on the circumstances described, that the person paying has paid for the registration of the person they assisted again." You can't just type it up yourself. At the hearing in July or August or whenever the judge will have two Witness Statements. One from Bank's director says you never made a second appeal. You say you did make a second appeal and the IAS concluded that payment was made. The judge will immediately twig that either you or the director is lying.  But who? Fail to show the documentation form the IAS and instead just produce something you've typed yourself will make it look like you just made up the appeal and you are lying and you will lose the case. Please let us see what the IAS adjudicator sent.
    • I used to have a retail outlet in London selling my husband's photography.  We also had a co-op with staff so they weren't directly employed by me, but I paid for the other overheads etc.  When my husband died, I carried on as usual for a while but then I became ill and moved quite far away so logistically was becoming very difficult.  I came to an arrangement (verbal) with one of the guys I trusted, that I would send him the images to print and sell as normal, and I wouldn't take any money, as a short term solution until I got back on my feet and worked out the best way to do things. He would pay all the  rent, insurance etc... Over a year later, not able to give things away for free anymore,  I drew up a contract as a wholesale agreement, so I would get everything printed and sent to him and I would invoice his for what he ordered. I noticed form the beginning that he wasn't ordering enough or frequently enough to be making any money, and was suspicious he was doing his own orders on the sly and ordering just enough from me to keep my happy.  I checked with my printer, which I've been with for 20 years, and he sad he wasn't getting orders for my images from anyone else. I emailed a few other printers to ask them to keep a look out for some images but I soon realised this would be impossible to police.  The only option really would be to buy a print from him and check the stamp on the back of it.  I finally managed to get hold of on the prints on sale, and sure enough, he did not order it through me.   In the contract he signed in 2022 it explicitly states that he must destroy all files I had previously sent him etc etc so e is in breach of that.  When I drew up the contract, I was careful to make sure it was legally binding, but before I let rip at him, I need to know where I stand.  The contract is here: PARTIES This WHOLESALE AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made effective as of 30th June, 2022, by and between ############################## The Supplier and the Client, collectively referred to as the "Parties," hereby agree to the following terms: TERMS AND CONDITIONS SALES OF GOODS The Supplier agrees to provide the following goods to the Client (“Goods”): Description of Goods ################################# Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b BOTH PARTIES AGREE: The Client purchases the Goods through the Supplier directly, and agrees to delete/destroy any previously held digital images (Goods) owned by the Supplier, and agrees not to use any such files for monetary gain, outside of this agreement, either directly or through a third party from immediate effect of this agreement. The Client purchases the other materials necessary for resale of the Goods independently of this agreement. The Client shall have exclusive rights for resale of Goods at ###########, and also with permission, as a retailer of the Goods elsewhere, provided that there is no conflict of interest between the Supplier and the Client. The Client is free to decide their own retail prices, for the Goods. The Supplier shall use #####  to provide the printed Goods on Fujifilm Crystal Archive paper, with Lustre finish, and will not use any other Printer unless #### cease to trade, without prior approval from the Client. The Supplier shall not impose restrictions on size or frequency of orders made by the Client. The prices provided by the Supplier shall not increase for a minimum of 3 years, unless the prices of the raw materials rise, in which case the client will be informed immediately. Any discounts/promotional prices of raw materials shall be passed on to the Client by the Supplier, and the invoice will show adjustments for this, as well as credit for return postage of any damaged goods. This agreement can be terminated by the Client without notice; the Supplier must give notice of no less than 90 days, unless the terms of the agreement are breached, in which case, the agreement can be terminated with immediate effect. PAYMENT Orders must be paid for upon receipt of invoice, via Bank transfer: ######### Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b DELIVERY AND INSPECTIONS All orders received by 12.00am (midnight) shall be processed by the Supplier the following working day and delivery of order shall arrive in accordance with the Royal Mail schedule, or DPD, should express delivery be requested. The Client shall be liable for the delivery charge which shall be added to the invoice. The Goods will be delivered to the address specified by the Client. The Client shall be provided with order tracking, and should any problems arise with the ordering system or the couriers (Royal Mail, DPD), the Client shall be informed without delay of any such issues. The Client will inspect the Goods and report any defects or damage to the Goods in transit as soon as possible upon receipt of Goods, and will retain damaged Goods for return to Supplier for refund/replacement. GENERAL PROVISIONS CONFIDENTIALITY The prices of the Goods and other information contained in this Agreement is confidential and will not be disclosed by either party unless with prior written consent of the other party. INDEMNIFICATION The Client indemnifies the Supplier from any claims, liabilities, and expenses made by any third party vendors or customers of the Client. GOVERNING LAW This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with UK Law. ACCEPTANCE Both parties understand and accept the wholesale arrangement stipulated under this Agreement. Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the Parties has executed this Wholesale Agreement as of the day and year set forth above.   Signed by us both electronically.   I haven't broached any of this yet, and I am looking for some advice about what action to take.  The main issue I've got is that he has still go those images.  If I terminate the contract, I will need to know that he no longer has those images and I can't think of a bulletproof way to do this. I'm thinking I might tell him I will continue with the contract but ask for a  sum in damages and say that if I find out he's still doing it down the line I will terminate the contract and sue him for damages. The damages side of things I'm not sure how it would work as he is self employed, and I'm positive he doesn't declare all of his earnings to HMRC, in order to find out how much I have lost, would the court demand to go through his tax self assessments?  I'm not sure how to proceed with this, I don't want to lose that place as an outlet as it is in a prime spot in London, which is why I let him have those images in the first place as I would have had to pull out altogether at that point.  I am regretting it somewhat now though.  Please help.
    • I cannot locate anything in my paper work that states 2 payments were made? Perhaps you could point this out? In reply from IAS it states "The ticketing data has been attached" nothing was sent to me. I made a response to the IAS all this was done online
    • Thanks again for your responses. The concern I have here, is that freeholder of the land (a company, who presumably would have been the ones to have initially instructed PPM to manage the parking here), will have proof of exactly how long the vehicle was on site for, as the driver was meeting operatives from that company on a separate matter. On this basis, if the matter was to get to court, I feel all the other technicalities about signage, size of signage/font, lack of start/finish times, will not be enough to have any case dropped? This PCN was brought up to the freeholder but they have advised that PPM will not waive this charge. 
  • 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

Big problems with a used car - what are my chances of getting a refund?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5277 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

Hello everyone,

 

2 weeks ago on Saturday I purchased a Seat Leon (2001) from an independent dealer. Last week I had this car inspected by a garage near where I live and they found so many problems with it the list was literally endless. They quoted the potential work to be in the region of £2-3k which is basically the value of the car. The car does have an MOT which was only just completed. A lot of the repairs are due to the door seals not being intact and there being damage to the ECUs/Dashboard from condensation but there are many other small issues that total up to big problems!

 

I rang the dealer at the weekend and they weren't too helpful, I told them that I was rejecting the car as it was not of satisfactory quality and that I wanted a refund. The guy told me no chance I'd get a refund but they'd be willing to look at the car and perform some repairs. Now I don't particularly trust them to do any kind of decent job considering the condition of the car and I really just want my money back to get something less troublesome. I spoke to consumer direct who gave ambiguous advice so I don't really know for definite, will I get a refund out of this dealer?

 

I have put into writing that I reject the car and listed the reasons and all the faults and am going to send it recorded delivery tomorrow, I just wanted to check with some people who could advise me before I do so.

 

Any comments or help will be hugely appreciated.

 

James

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry i can't help you, but do us all a favour and complain to the OFT about service from consumer direct. There are quite a few of us have not received the help expected from consumer direct, which begs the question "What are they in being for"? I have complained to the OFT, but they won't act until they get several people voicing their concernes. Jobs for the boys??????

Link to post
Share on other sites

You only have a 'reasonable' time in which to reject and though the length of time is not specified, more that two weeks, you are pushing that reasonable limit.

 

Could the seller have reasonably known about these faults? You are going to have to show that he did and by doing so nullified the contract between you if you hope to succeed with your rejection.

 

What prompted you to take it for an inspection?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was my intention to get it inspected as soon as I could to have it all checked out to make sure it was okay, the earliest the garage could fit me in was 1 1/2 weeks from the time when I bought it. So I'm acting as quick as I can. I believe the seller could have known about these faults as they claimed to have serviced the vehicle just before I bought it. With the extent of the repairs needed some of those must have been identified during that service.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand fully what you are saying, but the time to have an inspection is before you buy not afterwards.

 

Have you seen the reported faults with your own eyes, can you be sure the inspecting garage isn't touting for business.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The advice I got from the garage doing the inspection was, 'try to get your money back or sell the car on, its going to be more trouble than its worth.' They have been really helpful so I definitely trust the inspection they gave. They showed me how the door seals have failed and I have witnessed lots of condensation in the car. Also now the fragrance that it had been doused in is wearing off the car actually smells of damp and you can feel it on the upholstery. Another sign that the dealer knew about this problem. I'm not using the vehicle and haven't at all since I've bought it apart from to take it for this inspection. I think I've got no choice but to try to pursue a refund.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have every sympathy with your problem. I have just purchased seat leon on the trip home the engine management light came on. Reported this to garage who turned it off and told me to see what happened. When it rained water poured into car and light came on again. They have fixed light but not cured leak, after reading your post I have got nasty feeling that i have same problem, they will also not take it back. I have paid for legal protection from home insurance company, have you checked that you didnt get that with yours some companies just add it on automatically. Good Luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I've posted this to Kimboo also, but FYI the "reasonable time limit" is specified within the Sale of Goods Act. Section 48 stipulates that where a fault that could not have been identified by reasonable inspection presents itself within six months of purchase, then it can be assumed to have been present at the time of purchase.

 

The law is clear on this guys, if you have been supplied with faulty / unsuitable goods then you are lawfully entitled to remedy and where that remedy is disproportionately costly to the vendor (if it would cost them too much to repair) then you are entitled to replacement, or repair. You can rescind the contract if the vendor is not fulfilling their obligations.

 

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've posted this to Kimboo also, but FYI the "reasonable time limit" is specified within the Sale of Goods Act. Section 48 stipulates that where a fault that could not have been identified by reasonable inspection presents itself within six months of purchase, then it can be assumed to have been present at the time of purchase.

 

The law is clear on this guys, if you have been supplied with faulty / unsuitable goods then you are lawfully entitled to remedy and where that remedy is disproportionately costly to the vendor (if it would cost them too much to repair) then you are entitled to replacement, or repair. You can rescind the contract if the vendor is not fulfilling their obligations.

 

Good luck.

 

I am afraid that you are mixing up 'Reasonable time' with the discovery of an assumed inherent fault. The discovery of a fault within the first six months is assumed to have been there at the time of sale and it is up to the seller to prove otherwise.

 

That is not the same as setting 'Reasonable time' in stone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...