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

Full & Final Settlement Offers - Any Advice???


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4616 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

6. Can someone explain or point me in the right direction for the chapter and verse about why you should send the settlement cheque via a 3rd party?

 

"Nutshells contract law" by Robert Duxbury pages 35-36. (Cost me £8.95)

 

A contract must have "consideration" - something of value offered by each party.

 

Part payment of a debt is not good enough consideration to write off the balance.

 

BUT:

 

1. Composition agreements. Where a group of creditors agree to accept a partial settlement, none of them can sue for the rest after, because allowing them to do so would amount to fraud on the other creditors.

 

2. Part-payment of the debt by a third party. They cannot sue you after accepting F&F from a third party because that would amount to fraud against the third party.

 

Hope that helps:)

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 127
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Cheers for that Shinobi. Though I confess I still don't understand it!! Don't understand the fraud bit against the 3rd party.

 

Not completely sure I do in legal terms terms. Here's what I think:

 

Third party has no obligation to the creditor, but offers to settle the debt for a reduced amount.

 

If the creditor takes the third party's money as F&F and then sues you, they have dishonestly taken money from the third party.

 

Using dishonesty to make money is fraud.

 

You might get a better explanation if you copy and paste this into a new thread in the legal issues section.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It might be worth a letter to the creditor telling them you authorise your chosen third party to negotiate or act on your behalf. Don't know if it will help or not, but shouldn't do any harm.

 

The thinking behind that is to give them less to complain about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A word of warning: although the payments were made and I have heard nothing since all four creditors did not follow up with their agreement to remove the default from the CRFs. When I complained they stated they had to reflect a true representation of the account.

 

It's surely part of the contract? Does that not put them in breach of contract? Maybe you should have included a penalty clause that they will pay you £1000 if the defaults are not removed by a specified date say 3 months after the payment date.

 

Also, on the CRFs the settlement was not marked as a full and final settlement, but as " full and final settlement, although the amount did not cover the amount owed". What can you do?

 

My thinking on this is to offer a silver coin (or anything else of value) as consideration to forgo the balance. That way, if they accept it they have accepted part payment plus "sufficient" (doesn't have to be "adequate") consideration to forgo the balance. This really is full and final.

 

one letter stating that the payment had to be paid directly by the debtor.

 

Maybe they're not so stupid after all :lol: They obviously understand the 3rd party payment rule, i.e. they can't sue for the balance.

 

These four accounts all had valid credit agreements.

 

Awesome! Well done:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...