Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • so this was an email not a royal mail letter. they use email as a free way to p'haps scam mugs that know no better. not sure what this 30 days is you are going on about? send the SB by surface mail get free proof of posting. dx  
    • The firm said this month that its founder would sell up to 50 million shares over the next year.View the full article
    • Thanks DX, will aim to do that asap. A thought that came to my mind. The letter they sent doesn't have a 30 day deadline and I received it by email. Is that against the rules or have I got it wrong?  
    • Martin Lewis was one of the people who set up Money Saving Expert - and their site, like ours, takes great pains to point out that the parking companies issue invoices, not fines. A private company has as much right as me or dx or you to issue a fine - i.e. none. I haven't seen the programme but I'm damn sure Martin Lewis wasn't so stupid as to talk about non-existent "fines". I don't know what you mean by "unqualified".  Dx, Honeybee, Brassnecked, LFI and the other long-term Caggers have been here for 18 years dealing with about 22,000 of these cases.  The vast majority don't reach court, and of those that do about 85% are won.  Seems pretty "qualified" to me.
    • Yes, you outed yourself as the driver.  Mistake.  But who hasn't made them?  Especially in legal dispute when you've never been in the position before.  I certainly have.  Just learn for the next time. LFI's post is spot on.  Judges have ruled multiple times that if you paid then the registration nonsense is "de minimis". You're still in a great position legally, and will give Simple Simon a hell of a kicking. If you can call in the photo-taking-favour, that would be great.  
  • 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
      • 160 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
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...