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

Fredrickson's - Statute Barred


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5155 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

Well I will wait and see what happens next. I'm feeling a lot calmer since I sent the letter before.

 

Thanks everyone for your help. You are all fantastic and have made it possible for me actually sleep last night!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to butt in on your thread just wondering if anyone can help I have a statute barred debt with confirmation from themselves that the last payment received was by DD 30/09/2002, I have sent statute barred letter and they have now responded with an offer to pay 50% or they will still take court action, they have added a P.S. in handwriting on the bottom of the typed letter stating the default was only registered 05/11/2004 (seriously I kid you not in handwriting!!). Is this just a scare tactic, am I correct that this is statute barred from date of last payment NOT the default, which incidently I never received as they sent to an old address?? Please could someone just confirm. Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, this is a pretty disgusting tactic and it's one that should be reported to trading standards and especially the OFT. If the letter came from a solicitor, report them to the SRA also.

 

It's against OFT rules to attempt to mislead you in this way.

 

Who is the DCA?

 

If you start a thread of your own, you'll get help in writing a great letter in response. If you really want some fun, invite them to take you to court...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Donkey, they are in fact a solicitors Ruthbridge Ltd, just about to start a thread of my own to see how I approach the OFT and SRA etc and a response to them would be great!! Thanks for putting my mind at rest

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Donkey, they are in fact a solicitors Ruthbridge Ltd, just about to start a thread of my own to see how I approach the OFT and SRA etc and a response to them would be great!! Thanks for putting my mind at rest

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Donkey, they are in fact a solicitors Ruthbridge Ltd, just about to start a thread of my own to see how I approach the OFT and SRA etc and a response to them would be great!! Thanks for putting my mind at rest

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, a spate of duplicate postings everywhere at the same time! A CAG website glitch, I imagine.

 

You could cause them an awful lot of trouble with that letter. However, I bet they will blame a rogue employee or claim 'admin error'! For them to threaten legal action AFTER you have informed them it's SB is a gross breach on its own, but its seriousness is further compounded by their attempt to mislead you. Take 'em to the cleaners.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I received a letter from Fred's today in response to my prove it letter stating that they are no longer instructed in the matter and have returned the account to their client (Lowell's). Presumably I will start getting threats from them soon?!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...