Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi. I am reading through the full thread and will continue to research. I have come across a reference to a form called N180 DQ in the thread, but I cannot see any reference to this form in my case nor can I see it on the MoneyClaim website. Should I have been sent this form? Thanks 
    • 12mph (beyond any UK limit) will certainly qualify for a Fixed Penalty. So you should received an offer of a FP for each of the remaining two offences. Be sure to submit your licence details as instructed when you accept the offer. If you don't your £100 will be returned to you and the police will prosecute you in court.
    • and it will be also now written off under age related criteria anyway.
    • @dx100ukThanks for this! I'm still not clear if I'm facing more than 6 points on my license though. Can you explain any further please? When I accept the 2nd speeding ticket, will they just charge me £100 and 3 points, or will they be more severe consequences since that offense took place the following day of the 1st offense? Similarly, when I accept the 3rd offense, will they look at my record or just charge me with the £100 fine and 3 points? @Man in the middleI've been searching the forum and you seem very knowledgeable. Would you mind giving a look at my query please? Thanks in advance!!
    • Yes of course. That's why it says cc:: BIg Motoring World at the bottom. Don't imagine that this solves the issue. It doesn't. He not have to force the finance company and big motoring world to accept the rejection to give your money back. I suggest that you get the letter off tomorrow. And let us know what you hear but on Friday you should then send a threat to the finance company.   Have a look what I have said here about your options and read the whole thread as well.  
  • 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

They couldn't find the original CCA in over a year, now they say they may reconstitute one!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5121 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

Hello Everyone,

 

Could use a little advice, I've been dealing with CL Finance for some time now, they ignored numerous requests for a copy of the CCA and just continued sending treats after leaving small gaps between my letters. I reported them to the FO because of this and today I received a letter saying they don't agree with my complaint and after over a year of requests and now liaising with the OC to get a copy of the CCA or a reconstructed copy.

 

This reconstructed copy concerns me, I have a hunch the original doesn't exist and even if it did it probably wouldn't have the pre-described terms within a signed agreement as I never signed one being an online application from 2004-2005. What's to say they can't reconstitute one anyway with everything they need. Could really use some helpful advice.

 

Thank You!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many DCAs will quote Carey, claiming that the judgement allows them to provide a reconstruction. And so it does, which is why it makes them moist. If only the DCAs had read the whole thing, they'd have seen that the reconstructed agreement can only be used in response to a CCA request; they still need to produce the original in court.

 

If they send a reconstructed agreement, write back asking them to confirm whether or not the original exists, and if it does, why have they failed to produce it, and if it doesn't, why have they mentioned court action knowing that they cannot bring proceedings, which is an offence under CPUTR.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reconstruction needs to be a true copy, they can't just make it up.

 

In order for it to be a true copy of the executed agreement, to be 100% sure, they'd need to have seen the original agreement.

 

Anything less than this is hearsay evidence, if they took you to court.

 

You'd then beat them with the CPRs to prove it is a true copy of the executed agreeement i.e. they have someone elses agreement around the same time as yours but not yours etc? Why?

 

You'd get them to admit if they had it or not using CPR 31.14/31.15 and arrange a time to inspect the original with them. LOL

 

You'd go for no proof it contained the prescribed terms (pre April 2007) and non-compliance of the s77/s78 request. Maybe abuse of process for bringing the claim when in non-compliance of the s77/s78 request.

 

Drown them with legal costs, applications and the Civil Procedure Rules.

Link to post
Share on other sites

CL Finance aka LEWIS aka Cattles AKA Up a creek without a paddle

 

Desperate letters from a desperate company on the brink of being sold off and broken down into tiny little pieces.

We live in an unmoderated country why should the net be any different?

Bring back free speech we miss it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Cartaphilus
Desperate letters from a desperate company on the brink of being sold off and broken down into tiny little pieces.

 

Wonder what happens when they do ... be at the hands of DCAs and threats of bailifs themselves? ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...