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

MandM v Mint


MandM
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5102 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

thanks DX what should i do next as I mentioned have not heard anything from them since Aug 08. Should we let sleeping dogs lie and keep this up our sleeve until they wake up.

 

Mrs M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

up to you

i thought you were angling to get the default removed.

 

if you are not bothered then don't oupp their string.

 

you'll prob get a dca chasing, if thats the case & [like normally happens] the CCA is unenforceable, then i very small F&F would prob see this A/C done and dusted.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

do you mean defaults? or do you mean late payment markers?

you typically you should only have one per agreement.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

do you mean defaults? or do you mean late payment markers?

you typically you should only have one per agreement.

 

dx

 

Hi dx,

 

Sorry, I meant more defaults on other accounts ;)

 

Mrs M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Hi, Just an update.

Sent a CCA to mint. They replied in early December 09 and sent a copy of the agreement, looks like ours and a few others. They said in their letter that the balance is still outstanding and that they have not sold the debt, but still not heard anything from DCA or them.

 

Wait and see I suppose. Have still got the dodgy DN to fall back on.

 

Mrs M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi Dotty.

 

Nothing's changed here yet. Still getting the odd letter, paying token amounts. And they send a statement every now and then.

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi MandM,

 

Do you mind what % of the payments you are making or do you just pay as much as you can?

 

Have to say, Mint have not harassed us with calls and agreed 6 months freeze of interest. Just not happy that they plan to register a default.

 

I think if you are paying under an agreed arrangement, then I think the CRA's should be advised accordingly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dotty,

 

tbh Mint have been pretty quiet. They get much less than there 2.25% they wanted, it's a fraction of that. I'll dig the figures out tomorrow but they gave in without a whimper.

 

 

Just not happy that they plan to register a default.

I thought they marked it accordingly if you were paying under an arrangement but the default's still there. But only for six years from when it first went on. 4 and a half to go :).

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...