Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Unregulated agreement - smell a rat!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5217 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

I have an unregulated HP agreement for a vehicle through Mercedes Benz Finance.

 

I'm behind on my payments (3 months) but just 10 months from maturation of the agreement.

 

I was issued with a Default Notice and now a chap from a vehicle repossesion company has attended.

 

Why I smell a rat is this:

  1. This is an Unregulated agreement so there is no need to issue a Default Notice
  2. Why bother asking me to sign a Voluntary Repossession document when it isn't necessary. Under an Unregulated Agreement they can just take the car away
  3. Why the need to now go to court in order to have me give up the vehicle?

 

There's something here that just isn't right. An Unregulated agreement means that as I'm behind on payments, they are entitled to just take it back, so why not just take it? Why would they want me to sign a form? Why, when I refuse to sign the form, do they then have to go through the laborious process of going to court when they don't need to.

 

Anybody please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unregulated is when, at the time of my agreement, the amount borrowed was over £ 25k, meaning the agreement is not covered by the Consumer Credit Act.

 

That is unless the agreement was drawn up using a form which was actually intended for a regulated agreement, in which case it would be regulated even if it were over £25,000. This could have been done either intentionally or unintentionally by the creditor.

 

I have seen at least 1 case on CAG where this was done, although I probably couldn't easily put my finger on it.

 

However if this were the case here, it would probably be apparent to you because the agreement would probably say somewhere on it "This is an agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ... " or similar, and I doubt that is so otherwise you would have mentioned it.

 

Just pointing out that there are odd occasions where an agreement over £25,000 can be regulated.

 

Cheers

Rob

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unregulated is when, at the time of my agreement, the amount borrowed was over £ 25k, meaning the agreement is not covered by the Consumer Credit Act.

 

Also, the £25,000 limit was removed by the CCA2006 for agreements taken out after the relevant date (which I am not sure of without doing some searching), but I guess you're aware of that aspect.

 

Cheers

Rob

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Rob

 

Unfortunately the agreement was signed before the £ 25k limit was removed.

 

The terms and conditions are headed:

 

Contract Purchase - Terms and Conditions - Non-Regulated Agreement

(For use when hirer is a Corporate body or the balance financed exceeds £ 25,000)

 

Can you expand upon your statement 'odd occasions where an agreement over £25,000 can be regulated' please?

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Can you expand upon your statement 'odd occasions where an agreement over £25,000 can be regulated' please?

 

 

Basically as stated in post #5 above.

 

An example (which I think is what I read on here) would be where the creditor has completed their loan paperwork (accidently or otherwise) using the standard form which they would normally have used for a sub-25K loan, and that paperwork would therefore have printed on it "This is a regulated agreement ... " or "This is an agreement regulated by the CCA1974 ... " or similar.

 

I'm 99% sure the example I read on here which was for over £25,000 was then held to be regulated by the CCA1974.

 

But if your paperwork does not say this (it doesn't according to your post # 7) then I guess you can't go down that road.

 

Cheers

Rob

Link to post
Share on other sites

BUMPY BUMP!!!!!

 

I had one of these as well.

 

They wont remove my default notice, and are even saying that I still owe them money, even tho its included in BR.

 

Default notice was crap as well, defo will get it removed me thinks.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...