Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Aesmith - Thank you for your recent interest in my issues.  Input on people's topics can be most useful from specialised experts or those that have similar experiences.  Some people really struggle with knowing what to do (I certainly do) - so it is most useful and helpful and reassuring when solid sensible advice is offered.  I have found there to be some very kind, helpful, supportive and legally knowledgeable people here on cag over the years - who give sound legal advice for people to roll up their sleeves and follow up on.   Of course, sometimes it can be quite challenging sifting the wheat from the chaff.  I don't have lawyer or barrister.  I sometimes attend pro-bono legal clinics for help.  And sometimes have access to barristers via a pro-bono service called Advocate.  Both ad-hoc. Pro-bono means 'free'
    • The Judge was wrong. The keeper is only INVITED to say who was driving, there is no obligation for them to say.
    • Member of the Question Time audience asks Richard Tice about Donald Trump.    
    • I hope Lord Frost is OK. Islamists and the woke Left are uniting to topple the West ARCHIVE.PH archived 18 Apr 2024 19:12:37 UTC  
    • Ok you are in the clear. The PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 for two reasons. The first is that in Section 9 [2][e]  says the PCN must "state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper— (i)to pay the unpaid parking charges ". It does not say that even though it continues correctly with blurb about the driver. The other fault is that there is no parking period mentioned. Their ANPR cameras do show your arrival and departure times but as that at the very least includes driving from the entrance to the parking space then later leaving the parking space and driving to the exit. It also doesn't allow for finding a parking spot: manoeuvering into it avoiding parking on the lines: possibly having to stop to allow pedestrians/other cars to pass in front of you; returning the trolley after finishing shopping; loading children disabled people in and out of the car, etc etc.  All of that could easily add five, ten or even 15 minutes to your time which the ANPR cameras cannot take into account. So even if it was only two hours free time you could  still have been within the  time since there is a MINIMUM of 15 minutes Grace period when you leave the car park. However as they cannot even manage to get their PCN to comply with the Act you as keeper cannot be pursued. Only the driver is now liable and they do not know who was driving as you have not appealed and perhaps unwittingly given away who was driving. So you do not owe them a penny. No need to appeal. Let them waste their money pursuing you . 
  • 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

Welcome insurances, Gardx and VT


just_jue
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1785 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

  • Replies 213
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

just jue

 

keep at it, seems to me fos is toothless unless they think you will persue your case further and then they would have to justify their response.

 

just a thought if welcome have agreed to refund my Gardx as a goodwill gesture and applied it to my active account, if the same situation occurred with you, that would bring you £299.00 + interest nearer you vt figure

 

essexboy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good thinking as you know they have agreed to refund the £299 that they shouldn't have added so I have put that I want to make sure that no interest has been charged on this amount.

 

JJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

they def charged interest on this amount as it was within the cash price and that was subject to interest

 

so if i was you i would expect £299.00 + interest to be debited to your account

 

essexboy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got my response to the FOS and they finally agree with me - Hooray

They have recommended that the Vt value goes down by £100, to refund another £299 for the discrepancies and another amount for my inconvenience.

So I will sign this and send it back.

What happens now? Can Welcome dig their heels in and appeal or is the FOS decision final?

 

Thanks again for all your advice espically to Post & Essexboy

 

JJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

well its up to you if you accept the offer, at the end of the day its your choice to end this

 

i still say the gardex added to the cost of credit is unlawfull as its an optional extra but its how you feel as we would prob need a court to give a decision on that one

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea I did think that, but as I am close to the VT amount I am going to accept the deal then send the car back. Taking them to court could take a while and between then I would still have to pay them.

 

JJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry havin probs, what it is , I have the same one as you posted with price of vehicle £10107.00 underneath extras £299.00 then total ordered vehichle price £10406.00 which is on the agreement, now I have a copy of another used vehicle invoice which came in part sars states vehicle price 10,406.00 no mention of any extras does that make sense

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I am going to send off the VT at the beginning of next months as I have hit the magic number. I will be writing to Welcome (recorded of course), faxing, emailing and dropping off the letter to our local branch (if it is still open). So they cannot say they haven't got it.

If they try with the collection charge, am I right in thinking that they cannot legally charge over what would reasonable (i.e. back to where you brought the car)?

If they muck around am I also allowed to charge them rent on my drive and the cost of insuring the car?

 

Thanks again for all the advice I have received over my time on here.

 

 

JJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

dont want to burst your bubble but if you have an outstanding balance for this account will only reduce your balance

 

but i think that may have been your reasoning to reach the vt value if this is the case

 

well done and congatulations

 

essexboy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...