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
      • 162 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

mortgage shortfall....please advise

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5105 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

Last year my house was repossessed. June of this year (2010) I received a letter from Lloyds stating the house had been sold in January and that I have a mortgage shortfall of 23142.72.


Although I responded to their letter I did not make them an offer. I simply asked them to write off the debt due to ill health and in no financial position to ever pay off the debt - obviously they refused this. In their second letter they suggested I make repayments of £100 per month which is more than I could ever afford.


I wrote to them again - I claimed that the repayment was unreasonable and unmanagable I also threw in a few questions:


Have they made a claim on any mortgage indemnity insurance - they stated these had ceased in 2005 - is this true?


They also told me the property was sold under private treaty - what does this mean in plain english?


I also asked in my last letter if the property had been let since repossession - they stated that letting is not allowed during possession and subsequent sale. However, they claim the house was sold in January 2010 yet I know people had moved into the property in Nov/Dec 09 - So unsure of this situation.....ideas, advice?


This was a joint mortgage - I asked if they were also pursuing my ex partner for the shortfall but they have failed to answer this question....advice?


They now have said that they will meet me half way and will accept £50 per month. Again this would mean I would be paying out more than I receive in a month....I do have other debts.


Another thing that concerns me is that with their last letter they have attached another letter stating that that THEY refer to my offer to make repayments etc, etc and (they) would confirm the following,


You (meaning myself) have agreed to make 12 payments of £50 per month and 12 months thereafter...........


........the letter goes on to suggest I had made an offer.


Anyways, any advice on what to do next and answers to the above would be great. Thanks for your time in reading and look forward to all your replies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...