Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I see you already mentioned getting the tax. The important is you don't cancel your flight now. Give it until the last minute in case it does get cancelled in which case happy end!
    • In my opinion you don't have a leg to stand on.   You booked with an OTA, presumably so that you could save about £20 compared to buying directly with the airline.  You then selected to book two one-way tickets so that you can save another £20 compared to buying a return ticket.   As far as I can see there is no way on Trip.com to be mis-sold a 2x One-Way ticket instead of a return. You have to actively push the "book tickets separately" button. And then you get multiple warnings telling you what you are about to do, which you should not ignore. Trip.com know it and it's why they have shown you those screenshots.   Unless you found a workflow to purchase these tickets without the active choice and the multiple warnings, you don't really have a valid claim here. That it says "return" doesn't mean you were mislead. Every train ticket website will tell you "cheapest return: £XX.00" when you are buying 2 advance singles.   You are welcome to try a S175, but if I wouldn't expect the bank to rule in your favour.   There are also a few other things you can try:  Have travel insurance? They'll most likely refund you. This is by far the easiest solution. For your outbound that was cancelled, you are entitled to SAS rebooking you on a similar flight on a similar date. This should be your choice, not theirs. They cannot charge you for this. (They also cannot magically free up full seats so there are limits). Then you can fly your return ticket normally. Note that if you already asked for the refund you are screwed. Unless the refund was forced without your consent. Wait until the very last minute and hope that the 2nd flight will be cancelled too. If it happened to one it can happen again! If all else fails, you can get your tax back which should be a meagre amount but better than nothing. Make sure you cancel a few hours at least before your flight, not after, so you don't get a no-show.   
    • thanks dx hope this reads better POC 1.The Claimant claims payment of an overdue balance in the sum of 1739.60 incurred by the Defendant under a AvantCredit, Unsecured Loan, account number **********   2.The Defendant failed to maintain payments in line with the Agreement and the Account has now matured.   3.The account was then subsequently assigned to the Claimant and the Defendant has been given notice of the accounts assignment.   Note: The above is paragraphed by the Defendant as Claimant could not be bothered.    1.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. Paragraph 1 is noted and accepted I have in the past had financial dealings with AvantCredit. I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant and their solicitors.    3. Paragraph 3 is denied I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or AvantCredit.    4.It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant,   the Claimants solicitors have failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14 on date 26-07-2022 (recorded delivery), and the claimant remains in default of my section 77  request, dated 26-07-2022 (recorded delivery).   Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:  (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and  (b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and  (c) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;    5. On receipt of this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 77 request, copies of the documents referred to within the Claimants particulars to establish what the claim is for.   To date the Claimant has failed to comply to my section 77 request and their solicitors, TM Legal Services, likewise.     6. As per Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.    7. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82 A of the consumer credit Act 1974.    8. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.      
    • damn re post 26 annual statements disregard "alteration to 08-2016" should have been notice of sums in arrears "plus 1 in 2016 as alteration." sorry
    • your memory serves you very well! You’re correct on all points.    the original case which I won was on 3 tickets, all issued in December 2018. The ticket they are now Pursuing was issued in April 2019.  one issue I foresee is the first time round, they legitimately had not updated the signage and were out and out lying about that. The signage was updated in Feb 2019 and I have referred to that in my previous cases witness statement however you may remember that they were unable to evidence they had a contract in place for the site (their contract was from 2017 and was a rolling one so no evidence it was still in force) and the map of coverage they provided did not cover my space. 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

seen off by vauxhall dealership servicing?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4458 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 have an 8 yr old vectra. Full service history, major services before long journey, properly looked after etc. In Feb the car started to become very sluggish, reckoned it had something to do with the sparks so took it into the local dealership to be serviced. The replaced the sparks and coil £180- 2 weeks later the immobiliser went (aparently) they chaged for investigations only to find the battery in the key had gone. £180


9 days later I had a steering fluid leak £180- due to the jubilee clip cutting the steering fluid pipe. I had the steering rack changed in 2008, no leaks, no services picked up on slow leaks and the second I got home from the coil replacement the next day there was a pool of steering fluid.


Took it back to vauxhall and they fixed the leak by replacing the pipe. Next thing the brake pads were flagged and the brake pipes were 'badly corroded' both pads and pipe were replaced. £395. Massive knocking noise - but I was on holiday so I couldnt take it in for repairs


MOT'd the car today (i told them to check outthe knocking)- its failed because the brake pipes are 'badly corroded' despite vauxhall charging me to have them replaced. The MOT guy said they had merely been greased to hide the corrosion.


I took the car to vauxhall, they charged me a 'goodwill fee' of £108 instead of the £180 to replace the pipes. However the job only took 2.5 hours, despite the MOT guy saying to should take 4-5hours. They told me vauxhall have 'clipped the pipes to the underside of the car' yet the pipes were right inside the underside of the car.


theyve promised to look into the knocking noise stating it may be the anti-roll cage and since they were the last ones in the car theyd fix it. But it looks like Im gona get charged for it.


What can I do - when I tried to complain about the steering fluid pipe and how it could just 'suddenly leak' I was given a 15 minute introduction to the uses of jubilee clips and the complaint today was a nightmare. They completely didnt understand why I was angry. I asked how they had charged me to do the repairs and it was complete waffle coming formt he manager.


where do I stand on this thing, I genuinely think vauxhall have made the work for themselves and form what the MOT guy said he would be concerned with allowing them to do any further repairs on the car. Ive spent nearly £900 in 112 days on a car that was maybe 95% before they got it. Now its knocking, rattling, sluggish and always showing the engine warning light.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the dealer charged you for replacing brake pipes that then failed the MOT for corrosion then they did not do the job. Unfortunately, they now have the "evidence" Even so, as you have the MOT failure and hopefully an invoice stating brake pipes were changed, it is probably worth discussing the matter with trading standards.


The car is 8 years old and rubber pipes will perish and start to leak.


It is well worth asking to see the service schedule. If this states that the battery in the remote should be changed as part of a service and it has not been event though you may have been charged for a "service to manufacturers specifications" then you may have a claim.


Best bet is to go into bat with the brake pipe issue as you have some documentation.

Link to post
Share on other sites


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...