Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Incidentally, congratulations on not buying the warranty. That is another Big Motoring World rip-off. See what we have to say about extended warranties and the Big Motoring World attitude to them is particularly unhelpful
    • well that google is from 2019, but the photos are certainly of someone driving on the public highway in/out by an ANP system, though the site of where the camera actually is, is not showing there are anpr cameras up by the low yellow barriers but they wont get from facing shots from there. interesting, needs to be checked if the road IS a public highway but on private land, cause as you say, if the whole area is max 4hrs , how does the hotel work< ?? must have a reg entry system.  now as for taking pictures of cars on a public highway then guessing the are parking ...erm.... i dont thnk thats right nor allowed under GDPR. dx  
    • Under the consumer rights act 2015, if a defect manifests itself within 30 days and you have a right to return the vehicle for a full refund. If any defect manifests itself within the first six months of ownership then you have a right to return the vehicle for a full refund subject to the retailers right to carry out a repair. If the retailer declines to repair or if the repair fails then you have the right to return. The problem here is that you have to assert their right. It's a bit ridiculous – but you have to do let them know preferably in writing that you are asserting your rights under the consumer rights act either the 30 day right or the six month right. I suppose that you haven't done this – which would be quite understandable because most people don't know that these rights exist and that they are subject to these conditions – the condition that the right must be inserted. It is frankly ridiculous. The dealers know it and we have lots of instances of this company delaying appointments et cetera and our strong suspicion is that they are simply trying to run their customers out of time. On the basis that you haven't asserted your rights, we now have to look to ordinary contract law. You are entitled to purchase a vehicle which is of satisfactory condition and which remains that way for a reasonable period of time. Clearly it is in satisfactory. They are blaming you. Has your independent inspection identified the reason for the defect? This will be important because as you have seen BMW are already saying it is down to your driving and you are going to have to produce evidence that it wasn't down to your driving and the you drove it absolutely reasonably and it was simply the condition of the car. Have you been without the car for any period of time. Is it driveable now? If the car was off the road for a substantial amount of time and was still off the road then you would be able to argue that this is a fundamental breach of contract and that you have been deprived of substantially the whole benefit of the contract and therefore you will be entitled to treat the contract as breached by Big Motoring World and insist on cancelling the contract. It may be that you will eventually be obliged to keep the car but have the repairs paid for. Have you had any quotations for the work that needs doing? I asked you questions about the MOT – but you haven't responded.
    • A 'violent left wing mob', comprised of a chap in a red hoody with a damp polystyrene coffee cup and a bit of wet cement, gets nowhere near cowering frightened farage some distance away on top of his double decker bus .. as farages security and support seem to film the incident grinning     Farage bravely flinches, grimaces and seems to almost burst into tears as the 'objects managed to travel a part of the way toward his position on top of his bus. His reactions honed by having a bit of milk splash him at a prior incident allow him to swiftly fall into a protective cower and grimace .. .. Sometime after, once the mob of 1 had been safely bundled away, farage apparently wipes his eyes of tears, and rising from his cowed and frightened pose, bravely shouts “I will not be bullied or cowed by a violent left-wing mob who hate our country.” .. however few they may comprise of.   https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/nigel-farage-cement-barnsley-reform-uk-b2560501.html  
    • According to Parkopedia parking is limited to two hours.  I don't know how accurate this is though. What were you doing there for four hours?
  • 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 
        • Like
      • 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
  • Recommended Topics

black horse (is it a personal loan or is it a hp they dont seem to know


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5084 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

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • 2 weeks later...

hi guys, just to say still not heard from bh,,,,,,time is running out i think for them,,,,,what does concern me is the ruling of a judge that now says that the loan(bank)company can reconstruct a loan agreement(including singnatures) and prove that you have taken out this agreement,,,,not fair i think and has blown a lot of cases out of the water including lots fron cartel and credit card killers,,,not that we signed up with or dealt with them////

just thought i would update you pinky and dotty as you were good enougth to help me

 

bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where does it say a reconstructed agreement will be accepted as proof of a debt? As far as I am aware what the judge said in the McGuffick case was that a reconstrucion would fulfil a S77/78 request but you would still need the original to enforce the debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

from waht i am told the lender may reconstruct the original agreement basied on the deatils they had at the time or to hand withthem now and do not need the original signature???? i may be wrong and if i am thats great, but i think you may find out that if they send you the reconstructed agreement the court are saying you are on the hook for it,,, another big uk goverment bail out of the (*ankers)

Link to post
Share on other sites

i am sorry if this reply is short(LONG), as it was quite long to start with but this system does not let you to come back to the page you have written on goes down///

i do understand what you say but if you read into this ruling you will see that the bank/lender have the right to reconstruct the agreement and hold the credit file in negitaive against you for ever until u settle this matter (so much about inicent until proved guilty...good british law)

we are faced with a poisition where lots of banking and loan compines staff and work people know they made lots of money from pleb`s like me and u in commisions.....these some of these loans were not executed or written up correctley but never the less NO GOVERMENT will own up to this and we are all stuck with this///

i am not sticking up for compnies like cartel or credit card(CCK) as that would not be my reason,,,,but there seems to be a big--BIG swing against all us plebs(liitle wage earners(skint people)))))..... and for all of us plebs who have paid lots of money to the likes of the these aformention companies i do think the MOJ should be paying these customes back in cash as the (moj) are the regulators that should have seen this comming....shame on them......sorry i will now get off my pullpit now but i think we all have been lead a merry dance and why should it be us the plebs who have to suck the mop over and over again...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where does it say a reconstructed agreement will be accepted as proof of a debt? As far as I am aware what the judge said in the McGuffick case was that a reconstrucion would fulfil a S77/78 request but you would still need the original to enforce the debt.

 

Hi Bill,

 

I am with Pinky on this one.

 

If your daughter has still not heard anything, this may be an indication for you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi pinky and dotty,

 

i think i do undersatnd the position that the judge made and in reality he has sat on the fence again,,,,,,

by this judgement he has said that while a case waits to go to court the customer will still be marked down as missing a payment and therefore there credit file will be marked so and this will destroy the customes credit rating...

then when it goes to court and they can not come up with the correct papper work we still have not been told what will happen....

the judgement has just in real terms helped the banks to fend off our claims against thier bad practices just like the bank charge rulings...

it is such a shame that they can get away with it...

if you remeber my daughter also had a claim against the dealer has she had been sold ppi and other things,,,the update on this is we are still waiting to hear from them as they have 8 weeks to respond..

i thank you for your feedback

 

bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

hi guys,

though i would just let you know that we have recived payment for the ppi miss selling and also the gap insurance that was taken out at the time the car was purchased, so 1 down and 1 to go,,,,,black horse keep on sending threatening letters abou thloan as we have now stoped paying it completely, we have doen the subject to access and just got all docs back and are looking throug them now, but according to the letter they were posted 30 days ago????. will keep u informed...many thanks,,,bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

just thought i would tell u it looks like my daughter is going bankrupt and blackhorse are trying to take the car back although its in my name and i have paid her for it and i have owned it for 5years,,,any advice please

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...