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

Saranev - Birmingham Midshires shares vanished


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6330 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

I paid the mortgage we had with The Birmingham Midshires through my bank,

 

 

after my partner and i split up i continued to pay the mortgage by myself

they refused to take his name off.

 

 

After 3/4 years they floated the company and sent the shares to my ex who refused to give them back to me or them,

 

 

i rang them frequently regarding the shares but they said he was the first name on the mortgage

even though i was paying it and still living in the house :confused:

 

When i sold the house he had to sign the papers but there was no mention of the shares.

 

Has this happend to anyone else?

 

 

Is there anything

 

 

i can do about it after all this time

Saranev

 

Don't let them get away with it :mad2:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
:| As no-one seems to know anything about this at the moment, ive requested statements via the data protection letter. I will keep you informed. They've sent me a letter asking WHY i want the info? Should i reply?

Saranev

 

Don't let them get away with it :mad2:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
Link to post
Share on other sites

A company is classed as a seperate entity in law as is a person, the only difference is it has members. Why were these shares not allocated to the account holders - why is the first person named entitled to them? Surely all parties to the contract have equal rights? Where were the shares originally from?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys,

Sorry for the delay but i've been ill.

Hiya Tideturner.....the shares were allocated when they floated the company and were then taken over by The Halifax......i think!

Does anyone think i should persue this? The problem being that I'm sure the BM would only discuss this with both of us and as i'm no longer with the a***hole it would be more than difficult.

Saranev

 

Don't let them get away with it :mad2:

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I remember correctly, I had an allocation of approx. £480.00 which were worth a lot more if you kept hold of them. When presented, there was no mention of BM, just that I had been an account holder, therefore this may have been allocation for being current account holder.

 

Cannot get my head round the shares being allocated to the first named account holder, surely any benefit must apply to all who are party to the contract. You are joint and severally liable to most contracts (inbuilt clause). Of course, where a**holes are concerned you need to weigh up their involvement. Were the shares issued to the account or an individual. I would say the former and any action you would have would be against your ex. Anyone got any info?

 

Tide

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...

No they seem to have completely ignored my request. I'm sorting Lloyds out at the mo and as soon as i've finished with them i will start properly with The Birmingham Midshire, i will let you all know how it goes ok. Thanx for the interest.........i'll be saying that to Lloyds soon hahaha

Saranev

 

Don't let them get away with it :mad2:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Might be an idea to give them a reminder that the 40 days is up.

 

I refer to my letter of the XXX and note I have not received a reply. I would remind you that the 40 day limit for you to provide the requested information under the Data Protection Act 1998 has now lapsed, and would be grateful if you would provide this by return.

 

Should I not receive this information within the next seven days, I will report this matter to the Information Commissioners Office.

 

I look forward to hearing from you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...