Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • DX,   I've just noticed something, if you look at the uploaded documents relating to the CCA #6   You see the 2nd and 3rd page are contracts the first one is a blank contract the 2nd one is a digitally signed contract for Very. I can only assume the originally creditor sent the contracts digitally to the DCA and it looks like one of them has either been printed out as a blank page or they have removed the information from 2nd contract and made it look like 2 seperate contracts?   It looks like they only have information relating to Very and not Littlewoods? surley a none signed contract with no name detailing no amount of credit is not legally binding in court?   It looks like if it gets to court they'll go for the Very account but not have a case to argue the Littlewoods one?   Shop direct own both companies so assuming regardless of one signed contract for one company name would still need a seperate contract for another? and one signed contract doesn't work for both?   If this does go to court at what point do I ask for the hearing to be done local to me?
    • For Chrissake simeon!!!   Of course you cannot find para 18(d) that I referred to in #120!!!  That is because - if you had bothered to read #120 post correctly - you would have seen that para 18(d) is in FTMDave's post #105.   One of the improvements that FTMDave had made in #105 to my earlier draft was to replace my paras 13 and 14 with a single combined para 13.  This reduced the total number of paragraphs by one.  That was a good thing to do.   YOU in #121 then reverted to my earlier draft, thus wrongly reinstating para 14 from my draft which FTMDave had removed .  This meant that the para 18(d) that I referred to in #120 had become 19(d) in your version in #121!!!    So when I referred in #120 to FTMDave's draft in #105 and to para 18(d), I was referring to para 18(d) in #105, and not to any draft that I produced days earlier or that anyone else had produced.   And then, now that the para 18(d) confusion that YOU have created is sorted out, you must surely understand my references to para 19 after para 18(d), and to adding a new paragraph 20   Do you understand now?  (You must stop reverting to ealier draft versions and stick with the latest - otherwise it becomes incredibly confusing for all of us and you won't get this counterclaim completed in time!!!)   ========================================================================   All I can really advise you to do now is to read FTMDave's suggestions in #131, and follow them!   (You might find it helpful if you read again all our posts from #120 onwards to help you understand FTMDave's advice.)   You need to sort out your attachments (or exhibits if you prefer).  You've got them in front of you - we haven't - and you understand them better than we do.  Just make sure they are numbered and ordered correctly and are cross-referenced correctly to the Particulars of counterclaim.   Add in interest as per FTMDave's instructions.   And that is it.  From here it's not rocket science, it's just common sense.  If you don't understand by now we can't help.  You just need to polish it off.    
    • Hi there. To answer your questions. The Assessment of the car I got was by the DVSA. The 3 Dangerous faults. Seatbelt webbing significantly weakened offside front. Seatbelt webbing significantly weakened nearside front. Passengers seat insecure Nearside.   The Seven Dangerous Faults. Headlamp aim obviously incorrect. Supplementary restraint system indicates a fault Drivers door hinge insecure Fuel cap sealing device missing (cap seal missing) Fuel Cap Sealing device ineffective (filler neck sealing face damaged) Battery insecure and likely to cause a short circuit Power steering malfunctioning (limited power assistance, power steering pump noisy)   2 advisories  no spare wheel fitted Tyre worn close to legal limit.   The link to Companies House https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/08471137   The MOT was obtained on the 8th of October after I had paid a deposit and two days before I took possession of the vehicle. The Garage the MOT was obtained from is in Bristol as is the dealer. I live around 130 miles from the dealer.   I have engaged with the thread as far as possible with other commitments and did not notice the set of questions I did not reply to in my first post which was responded to at 1 in the morning. Any help is gratefully received.      
    • ok. well you could try appealing using the forms you used before i will guess these: you dealt with the others so why not this one? they at the time should have equally been aware there was another PCN outstanding and dealt with that too or atleast told you.   not really sure but worth a try.   im sure a brief likewise note to the bailiff will halt things for now, once he know forms have gone in/history.   dx  
    • Hi BankFodder,  From what I see, the MOT place is based in Milton Keys, the dealership said that they received this vehicle in a trade-in deal.  The agent said he has used this vehicle to travel to Birmingham and back to London with no issues, but then when I spoke with another agent via phone, he stated that its a new vehicle and they haven't really test driven it properly etc... I believe that everything they have said so far is a lie and what they stated on the sales/page on auto-trader is also a lie.  I'm unsure who did the MOT, but I have reason to believe it was the previous owner. 
  • Our picks

Brighthouse : optional service cover refund ?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3282 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

hello

 

i am in the process of claiming back the osc with ombudsman ,that brighthouse made me take and would like to no if anyone else as done this and what was the outcome ,could i get my money back or not :???:

 

thanks debbi

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

hi again

i have got a letter back from brighthouse about my claim for the osc money back .as just as i thought it would be states that i was sat down and told word for word about my agreement and osc this as never happened and i was told when i questioned about osc that i had to take it or no goods simple as that .they also enclosed as they say 2 true copys of my agreements that i am claiming for which on my originall agreement i never ticked the boxes for any of the insurance but on one they have enclosed as been ticked but not by me are they allowed to tamper with my agreement .

agreement number 2 which they enclosed is not even the correct tv that i have my agreement for and paid .theres is all same price and dates but diffrent tv model and none of my signatures on it at all and this is the first time i have seen this agreement .this tv on there agreement is a loaner tv i was left with 4 weeks before my agreement was due to end as the tv i had did not match to the one on my agreement and was taken to be verified and was told that i would be given the correct tv which states on my agreement once its been verifed then on my last week of my agreement i called up my local store yet again and my tv was still in a queue to be looked at and that the only option is to keep the loaner tv which broke 2 weeks later paid £1336 for a tv ive never had and left with a broken tv collecting dust in my bedroom

 

my tv on my agreement was a baird 42in with freeview - the tv i had and paid for was a baird 42in without freeview brighthouse set up my tv when they delivered it.

when the brighhouse engineer came to my house he said whats the problem i said i have just had my sky tv turned off and i can't find any freeview on the tv he said this tv does not have it can i see your agreement ,so i showed him and he said i have the wrong model and i should have had the newer model and took it away and left me with a damage tv .

 

i am now taking this futher with ombudsman and have done all the photo copying of agreements letters etc...

 

i will keep everyone updated on this problem. ombudsman v brighthouse who will win

Edited by debbi79
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...