Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Cat damage help.


Harry74
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4976 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

Hi, I'm new here I hope I've put this in the right forum! My problem is yesterday my neighbour came round asking for my insurance details for my cat. I told him I don't have any and he said well you will be getting a letter off my car insurance as your cat has scratch my bonnet of my car. As there are many cats in the street I asked how he knew it was mine, he said he had it on cctv. I have had the cat for 6 years she doesn't go out much and I have never seen her on a car bonnet! Where do I stand? Will his insurance insist I pay for a respray? I have looked at the scratches they are just above the wheel on the corner of the bonnet. Am I going to get a big bill before christmas?

Thanks in advance for your help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he's taking the mick to be honest!

I've never heard of such a thing, as teacup above says ask for evidence, it's very unlikely he'll be able to prove it was your cat that actually left any scratches.

I dont think he's even got a case, cats are free roaming animals and as such are a law unto themselves.

I wouldnt fret about it too much :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though you do not have cat insurance per se, you may have family liabilities cover under a contents and/or buildings insurance policy, IF you were held legally liable. However, I have previously heard that there is NO human responsibility for a cat's actions.

 

However, if you have such insurance, it's worth reporting the allegation in case something arrives on your doorstep in the future, but DO NOT mention anything to the aggrieved neighbour at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

However, I have previously heard that there is NO human responsibility for a cat's actions.

 

This wouldn't always be true but it will be in this situation. With dogs owners are obliged to be in control of their animal at all times so if your dog jumps up on someone's car and scratches it then yes it's up to you to get it fixed. Cats, no chance though even if there were the 'damage' would be minimal and so would the cost of fixing it.

 

The sort of situation where you could be in trouble with a cat? Well if you don't bother to worm it regularly and it repeatedly uses next door's childrens' sandpit as a toilet you would be liable if those kids got infested. Not because you are expected to control your cat but because you would have been negligent and as a result of your negligence your cat became a health hazard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...