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
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4936 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

 

Not sure if i am posting in the correct place apologises if im not.

 

My OH purchased a TV through homebuy in May 2008 with the agreement starting on 2nd June and lasting for a total of 156 weeks so the agreement he signed should be ending June 2011. However after myself going through the statement they sent I have realised that they have extended the agreement to 309weeks effectively making it so that it does not end until June 2014. As far as my OH is aware he has never received no notification of the extension and they are still collecting the same amount in the monthly payments. What i would like to know is are they allowed to extend the length of the agreement without OH consent, if not how can we sort this out?

 

Any help is gratefully appreciated

 

Sian

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

thanks for replying.

 

Yes we have the original agreement, it states on there that he should be paying for a total of 156 weeks commencing on 2nd June 2008 but nothing about an end date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It does not need an end date, that can be worked out from the start date - I would say 156 weeks is roughly 3 years worth, so the last payment should be around the end of May 2011 - the exact date can be worked out by counting the weeks.

 

Have you bought anything else from them? Or ended up in arrears? Or had a new tv at any point? Have they added insurance?

 

Have you always kept up with the payments? (Though I cannot imagine any arrears doubling the cost!)

 

Basically, they cannot change the contract without your agreement, the statement they have sent sounds as though there has been a mistake. It could be a simple mistake, such as someone entering the purchase twice but you certainly need to find out what has happened, and get it corrected - from what you say, you have the evidence, you have right on your side, it should be very simple to resolve.

 

Don't let them get their hands on the contract, always take a photocopy in if they ask to see it, or send them copies - if that contract leaves your possession, your proof that you do not owe the extra 3 years is lost!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi thanks for the reply

 

I have spoken to my OH and when he was with his ex partner she had a nintendo wii put on to his account so he is paying for that aswell but he says that they increased the payments when this was put on. After reading through the agreement i have found that homebuy have put nearly £1700 on to the cost of the tv for optional maintenance cover which was never explained or asked for.

 

Do you think it would be a good idea to SAR homebuy as we dont have the original agreement for the wii?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...