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

Allocated Parking ?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5097 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

Can anyone figure this one out

We live in conversion in Glasgow, and are the last of the original owners.There are eight flats but only six parking spaces. We are trying to figure out who does not have a parking space as over the years the issue has become confused

Our title deeds and that of two of our neighbours are quite specific - ie "being parking space marked No 3 range of parking spaces located on the ground to rear of said dwelling house" etc.The other two deads which we have managed to obtain just say that the have an allocated (but not numbered )parking space. A solicitor has told one of the new owners that over the passing of time it may be that there have been "errors" in the title and that all eight deads may indicate that they are allocated spaces----Which I find confusing when our deads are specific ( written in 1984) So firstly can we re claim our parking space? And what if we wish to sell?

Also the original planning deads in Glssgow show six specific places.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and Welcome,

 

I'll move this thread to a more appropriate Forum.

 

Regards.

 

Scott.

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would guess that if your deed names a specific space, and that space is not named in any of the other deeds, that it is yours, there cannot be any claim on your space. It is not your problem if that leaves 7 people squabbling over the other 5 spaces.

 

The information you have is very much "may", you don't actually know that there is an error, as you don't have all 8 deeds. If you were to sell, then you could say that all 8 flats seem to feel they have the right to park there, but that your space is yours in the deeds, and that no one else has ever laid claim to it (which I assume they have not?).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your response. No there have been no "claims" over my space, but there is a section of new owners who seem to be demanding their rights as they have been advised by the previous owners rather than the facts of the deads.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but there is a section of new owners who seem to be demanding their rights as they have been advised by the previous owners rather than the facts of the deads.

 

Then that is information their solicitor should have established at the time they were purchasing the property. We pay solicitors enough at the time we move house and it does seem rather important that part of their responsibility should be to make sure we are buying what we think we are buying and not just rely on the previous owner's "hearsay" comments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

being parking space marked No 3 range of parking spaces located on the ground to rear of said dwelling house

 

I don't understand the issue. Is there a space marked number 3 for you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue is that the two people who do not have a space are parking in the car park.This means that if you are one of last in you cannot get the doors fully open to get out ( size 10 and I have to breath in - husband has no chance !) also if you have passengers/shopping etc on front seat you have to stop and get everying out and then try and park. Basically the car park is too small. It now transpires that there are six spaces marked on the original plans and six of the owners have on their deads that they have ownership of number X. The two other owners have -- "they have exclusive use of a parking space" However there is no indication of any extra room/space/visitors space etc. So we are now think that there is a error in the deads .

Link to post
Share on other sites

only for those that don't have a space on the plans. makes you wonder about why the deeds for the two odds one were drawn up like that. a term like that adds value to the property and if the term is false....

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is what we are thinking. The solicitor of the lady next door who only bought 3 years ago has said that it is not looking hopeful ! She is 75 and does not have the time, energy or money to take this further :mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...