Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • My story starts with being issued a windscreen PCN on 8/3/24 which was almost immediately removed and a second  PCN was then  sent by post on 13/3/24  [deemed delivered 15/3/24] which I did not receive and had to send an sar to have that particular mess revealed later  but that is not the reason for my complaint. UKPC then sent a Keeper Liability Notice dated 12/4/24 warning me that as 28 days have now elapsed, I as keeper am now liable for the charge.  This is in direct contravention of PoFA since the keeper does not become liable to pay until the day after the original PCN is deemed to have been given which would have been 13/4/24 -a Saturday ]. Not only does it not comply with PoFA but it fails to adhere to your Code of Practice and is in breach of their agreement with the DVLA.  I have included copies of both Notices for information. You will realise the seriousness of this situation if this is standard practice from the UKPCM to all motorists or just those where windscreen tickets are involved since the Law regarding PoFA is being abused and it is unfair to misguide motorists. I await your  response which I understand will usually be within a week.
    • It probably deletes after a certain time. What a shame you did not check at the time. However I have no doubt that there was a PCN envelope under your windscreen wiper  as shown quite clearly on one of the photographs. . It would seem strange that it was placed there empty hence the reason I stated a second Notice was issued [though not necessarily sent. As I said in that letter to IPC that was not what the complaint was about and probably  IPC will ask about that at the same time if they accept you  going direct to IPC for the other matter. It is immaterial how many original PCNs were issued or not issued. You are able to show the two that you have from their sar one of which coincides with the one you received in the post and that is the one that does not agree with the date times of PoFA. Thus breaching not only the Act, but also the IPC  Code of Conduct and the ability of UKPCM to obtain data from the DVLA. So leave that part of the letter as good to go. However as it is as Dave [Thank you Dave!} pointed out that it is UKPCM and not UKPCI have amended the letter and posted it below.
    • Just under half of young savers put away at least 20% of their monthly income, compared to just 12% of 45- to 54-year-olds.View the full article
    • Its based on 10% annual depreciation, divided by 52 weeks and then x the excess number of weeks that they have had the vehicle for, after the agreed initial 3 week repair.
    • LOL LOL LOL Don't need that many to deport a handful of volunteers - at best Home Office department processing Rwanda deportations told to cut jobs Exclusive: Illegal Migration Operations Command freezes recruitment and draws up redundancy plans, leaked documents show Cant have hundreds of well paid people in a department deporting a single volunteer when we have an upcoming election to lose now can we - VIPal drenched in riches and departments full of pals well paid for doing nowt will 'sadly soon be history - was rumored to in a text from a soon to be ex-minister texting in from one of his main jobs in a number of industries he will soon be unable to help.   Home Office department processing Rwanda deportations told to cut jobs | Immigration and asylum | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Exclusive: Illegal Migration Operations Command freezes recruitment and draws up redundancy plans, leaked documents show  
  • 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 
      • 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

Sky+ box


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6457 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

Have had this for over a year now, but it has developed a fault. When I phone up to ask for it to be fixed I am told that it will cost me for a new box and an engineer to come out. When I say that it should last longer than a year I am told if I don't want to pay then they cannot fix it. Anybody have any ideas how to get them to fix it, do I phone them quoting sale of goods act or write to them or even try trading standards?

PRELIM 18 Aug 06 - Business Account RBofS £735 - Reply recieved 12 Sept. Fob Off:mad:

LBA 1 Sept 06

Link to post
Share on other sites

The box only comes with a 12 month manufacturer's warranty, so I'm afraid that Sky aren't obliged to cover repair costs after that. As previously mentioned, if you call back and tell them you're cancelling, you WILL be offered a free service call. If they're unable to repair the fault on-site, they'll replace the box for you.

Ulster Bank

Paid in full Jan 2007, £2266.00

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually the sale of goods act, does state that goods should work for a reasonable amount of time regardless of Manufacturers warrenty or extended warrenties. A Sky + box should be expected to last around five years. So despite what they say they should fix or replace it for you. Look up the Sale of Goods Act for correctlegalk jardgon on this, Ive used many a times for electrical goods where they keep blabbing on about 1 year blah blah blah is rubbish trust me!"!"!

Allyxia

KEEP FIGHTING FOR YOUR MONEY - EVEN WHEN IT GETS TOUGH

The Banks are somewhere which lends you an umberella when it is sunny, and takes it away when it rains

 

HSBC £1200 - Settled in Full

Cap 1 2 X £100 - Settled in Full

Nationwide £1641 - Settled in Full inc Default and CCJ Removed by Court Order

NatWest £2215.60- Settled in Full and Removed Default Natice

Woolwich £3690 - Settled in Full

Link to post
Share on other sites

My 7 year old Sky+ box also developed a fault recently, a couple of days after cancelling the subscription but that's not relevant, when we phoned to discuss it transpired that Sky had been running update programmes/messages and ours froze. They tried to get us to pay £60 for an engineer, thankfully it was MrFroogle who was speaking to them and he put his foot right down, and basically said you broke it you fix it, engineer was here next working day... hubby is better at that sort of thing.

 

I'd get back on to them if you think its a similar problem.

Worth a try :p

Requested statements 01/09/2006, received 07/09/2006, prelim sent 08/09/2006, standard response received 13/09/2006, LBA sent 25/09/2006, returned & re-delivered by hand 05/10/2006, MCOL 31/10/2006

Link to post
Share on other sites

To expect a sky+ box to last 5+ years under SoGA is to be blunt unreasonable. Just the box part yes it should last a decent amount of time but there is also a mechanical part in there - The hard drive I would say expecting a 40GB hard drive that is more or less always spinning to last 5 years is not reasonable, however it should definitely last longer than 12 months without a shadow of a doubt.

 

The old cancel trick works a treat every time though, also if you want some freebies try this one

 

Phone up and say you're thinking of cancelling what channels would I get free if I do, they will then launch into their spiel and you'll probs get half price everything for 3 months then wait a few months after that 3 months and try it again lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rich44 is right. I worked for Sky's sales team when I lived in Scotland and they employ a whole team just to persude you to stay with them, They offer incemtives by giving away free channels ect.They also don't like confrontation and will back down if you stand fast and demand it be fixed or you will take your business to NTL.

Please Click The Scales if I have been of help to you.

 

 

Kensington Mortgages withdrawn. no costs

NatWest Settled in full

Abbey Court Settled in Full

Capital 1 settled in full

Halifax settled in full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Success, I finally mangaged to not get bored and hang up after all their optons and waiting. I was amazed how quickly they caved and are sending an engineer out on Monday. No charge. Thanks for all the help.

PRELIM 18 Aug 06 - Business Account RBofS £735 - Reply recieved 12 Sept. Fob Off:mad:

LBA 1 Sept 06

Link to post
Share on other sites

The hard drive I would say expecting a 40GB hard drive that is more or less always spinning to last 5 years is not reasonable

 

I am an IT professional with expertise in designing reliable data storage systems, and I completely disagree with that statement. Since the early 1990s, the mean time between failures of low-cost disk drives has been over 25 years.

 

According to its web pages, Seagate warrants its low-cost drives for five years; see:

 

Barracuda 7200.9 - ST3402111A Product Family

 

Tim

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah well i'm an IT professional too shall we turn this into a peeing contest?

 

Do you really trust the word of the ppl who make the drives in the first place? Thats like believing HP and Epson when they quote their ppm speeds.

 

UNDER IDEAL CIRCUMSTANCES maybe there is no way in real world applications that you can expect a constantly spinning hard drive to last 5 years.

 

Remember that the Sky+ boxes are under cooled to start with, we're talking in a small sky+ box here NOT in a large fan cooled PC. Have you actually taken a Sky+ box apart and seen the cooling involved??

 

MTBF figures never work in the real world they are estimated under lab conditions or are you claiming they develop a drive and test it for 25 years prior to release its also why its referred to as Reliability Prediction Procedure

 

The key word is prediction its not real.

 

Seagate may well warranty their HDs for this long BUT again thats in a PC rather than a home appliance and besides if you took it to court its a mechanical part a judge is going to look at the cost of the box and the length of time you claim it should last and say tough IMO.

 

Not to mention this whole discussion is totally irrelevant to this thread as the fault was nothing to do with hard drives it was either a fault with the LNB, cabling or the sky electronics side of the box

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...