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

Help Cout date and CCJ with charging order!!!


Worsteve
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4667 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

It's one day short. A court assumes that a DN is posted second class and takes four working days to be served unless the creditor can prove it was sent 1st class.

 

You could not have received it before the following Tues 13th. Then you have a statutary 14 days to remedy = 27th

 

Is it not 2 days short as the DN states before the 26, does that not mean Sunday the 25?

 

Can someone else with more knowledge confirm this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 359
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Defaultnotice005mod.jpgDefaultnotice006mod.jpg

Hi Pinky

I think you might be confusing welshpersons3 POC (as an example for worsteve to use). Or maybe it's me thats confused :???:.

I'm refering to worsts DN as above.

Before the date shown.

Edited by enslaved
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...
Upon looking at the dates it would be deemed ineffective.

 

If the DN was posted on the day it was produced ( as a Court would do) then it would be deemed served 2 dyas later if posted by 1st Class or 4 days later if posted using 2nd Class.

 

If 1st class was used then it would be deemed served on Friday 26th June 2009 and you would have 14 days to pay (or remedy) the outstanding arrears which would be Friday 10th July 2009 not the 9th July as stated.

 

If 2nd class was used then it would be deemed served on Sunday 28th June 2009 and a remedy date of Sunday 12th July 2009.

 

Is it not Tue 30th June 2009, as weekends do not count for postage, service of documents?

 

Have a look at the link below for a more in depth look at defective DN's -

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-2166205.html

 

Perhaps DD can confirm this

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...