Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Here's something I'm hoping to clarify before I get in trouble for it:   There is a street close to where I live that was transformed into a temporary Pedestrian and Cycle Zone due to a school that's there. I know I can't enter it during those times, but can I be fined for having my car parked on that street while the zone is active? So far I have only heard one interpretation, from my neighbour, who said you can have your car parked there and you can exit the zone while it is operational, oddly enough, but before I take her word for it I want to get some more opinions on the matter.   For reference, here is what the Council's own website states: "It is an offence to enter or drive in an active school Street without a valid school street permit." (emphasis mine) Would this prove my neighbour right or can they still find a different interpretation to it that would carry the risk of a fine if I park my car there?   The sign for the zone is very similar to the image attached below, only different operating times.      
    • good i can see where you got that from  pers i'd put back, suitable adapted the line:   3.Throughout this period XXX only ever served estimated bills which were grossly over estimated with values unrelated to actual use. There was and still remains an unresolved dispute with XXX which was never resolved prior to the assignment of the alleged debt.
    • Hi Mr S,   Read other threads here posted over the last year or so.   We pretty much advise the same thing - ignore demands from the gym, their admin company, any DCA they use and any legal firm they use.   No need to engage with the gym or admin company to discuss or argue your wish to cancel - it'll get you nowhere.   If you want to leave the gym now, just give a month's written notice then cancel the DD m,andate .   If you want to cancel from October 2021, confirm this to the gym in writing early October, allow the final DD to be taken in October, then cancel the DD mandate.   You'll see from other threads that no action is taken to claim money and gym m/ships do not affect your credit records.
    • Update on the situation:   Following the run in with the police he has actually gone to the police station himself to question what he was told and was told there is no issue with him idling or moving the car around the car park, so the police officers who told him that were wrong.   As a side note, he knows who it is that's reporting him. Seems to be a bit of a feud between them, but the clarification he got from the police should at least stop them coming around every time a report is made.   Thank you to everyone who replied to this question!
    • I have had another good look around but still struggled to find any templates. I did find a defence on a thread that I have adapted below. I would greatly appreciate some input before I file it. Again, many thanks in advance.   Defence   1. I the Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   2. It is admitted that I have had a supply and service agreement with Co-operative Energy in the past. During the period, Co-operative Energy actively blocked me from hanging to a cheaper tariff or switching provider as there was an outstanding balance on the account.   3. Throughout this period Co-operative Energy served estimated bills. This is shown in the one copy of a bill that the claimant has been able to provide. The claimant has given no details as to the full breakdown of their claim and what dates it relates to, so I am unable to defend specifically until the claimant can particularise and quantify its pleadings.   4. Pursuant to OFGEM code of back billing rules the alleged charges are now over 12 months old and relate to charges which have not been billed correctly by Co-operative Energy and are therefore prevented from charging.   5. The claimant does not have access to the agreement nor was the Assignor required to retain a copy. Therefore their claim is unsubstantiated.   Pursuant to the civil procedure rules Practice Direction 16 (7.3) Where a claim is based upon a written agreement.   1) a copy of the contract or documents constituting the agreement,  the original(s) should be available at the hearing along with a complete breakdown of how the charges accrued by date and amount.   With the court’s permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to: -   a) show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement. b) show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed. c) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.   6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   7. It is therefore denied that the defendant is indebted to the claimant as alleged or at all.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 32 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

  • Recommended Topics

HELP used car £1300 to put right

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4042 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

I purchased a 2003 vauxhall zafira 5 weeks ago from a car dealer and the car broke down so I had it towed to my regular mechanic as the car dealer told me that I was only covered for 30 days.

It turns out that I needed a new clutch,fly wheel, coil spring and a gear box mount totalling £1,300.

I rang the car dealer and spoke to one of the salesmen who told me that I had a bargain, and that the clutch wasn't covered as it is a movable part and he just fobbed me off.

I then managed to contact the owner of the car lot,and he said that the clutch wasn't covered even though my partner queried the clutch after the test drive and the owner got into the car and to check it out and said that there wasn't anything up with it.He said that he would ring me back later that evening and see what he could do. Whilst I was talking to the owner the other salesman shouted in the background that he would come around to my house and burn the F-----g car down.

Because nobody called back that night I let my mechanic carry out the repairs and he has said that he will write a report saying that the clutch was totally worn out and it must have been like this at the point of sale.

Could anyone advise if they think that I could pursue this any further and what I should do next.


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes you should pursue it further especially in view of the profanity and threat. I don't suppose you have a witness to his threat?


The dealer has to prove during the first 6 months that there were no inherent faults that were not mentioned to you at the point of sail.


Your first error was in telephoning the dealer, you have no paper trail of their non compliance. If he hasn't started already, stop your mechanic going ahead with the repairs, you can then give the dealer another chance to repair it only this time by recorded delivery letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because I was told that I was only covered for 30 days I have already had the car repaired.

Is there any way of finding out if this dealer has had other complaints made about him. I have had a quick search on the net but couldn't find anythinganything.


Link to post
Share on other sites

do you think it is worth going any further with this considering that I have had the car repaired by a different garage.

I want to take this further but my partner doesn't due to the threat being made. We have 3 children and he is worried that if threats have been made already then what type of people am I dealing with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all with regards to the threat you should report that to the police if you haven’t done so already.

As for the clutch, this is a little bit more complicated? I’m not sure where you stand from a legal point of view but from an engineering point of view clutch is service part that will definitely wear out and need replacing during the life of the car. Depending on the type of failure sometimes it can be very difficult to predict when a clutch will fail? If the pressure plate is worn then it is usually easy to pick up as the engine will rev freely but the car will not be accelerating at the same rate i.e. slipping clutch, common issue. However if there is a fault with the pressure plate or the diaphragm spring then it can be more difficult to spot as these parts can fail with little or know warning. One of the tells of a worn diaphragm spring is that it will be difficult to put the car into the lower gears or reverse. When you test drove the car did you notice any of these issues? How did the clutch fail? Was the clutch slipping or were you not able to put it into the lower gears?

In my opinion I think it will be very difficult to try and pursue the garage for this issue as you had driven the car for 5 weeks prior to failure. I would still suggest reporting them to the trading standards (or whatever it is called these days) and to the good garage scheme and try to get them removed from the list.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My partner test drove the car and noticed that he had to raise the clutch pedal very high to catch the bite. He queried with the dealer if the clutch was ok and the dealer got into the car, tried the pedal,and said that it was ok and all zafiras were like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
reporting them to the trading standards (or whatever it is called these days) and to the good garage scheme and try to get them removed from the list.


You can't get anyone removed from there, it is all a big conn job, it's not a genuine list of good garages.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...