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

Citi/Cabot cannot comply with CCA


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4642 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, on 27th May I received a letter from Cabot "welcoming" me as they had bought the debt from Opus Credit Card - I presume this was at sometime transferred from CitiCard to Opus but cannot find any documents relating to that.

 

I sent a CCA request and a "stop harrassing me on the phone" letter from the library on the 3rd of June.

 

I received a letter dated 6th June saying they would go back to the original lenders - copy attached. Then another letter dated 20th of June saying they can't find anything yet and they know they haven't complied with the timescales - copy also attached.

 

From other threads on this forum, it appears this means they can no longer enforce the debt even though it still remains due.

 

Have I understood this correctly? Is there any relevance to them returning the £1 as they did not accept the statutory fee? Also what do I do next please?

 

Many thanks in advance.

CitiCard CCA response 1 - anonymous.pdf

CitiCard CCA response 2 - anonymous.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

In respect of the postal order, this is normal practice and is of no consequence.

 

While they cannot supply the agreement, they canot enforce it. If they provide the agreement at any time in the future (up to 6 years) they can recommence collection.

 

They may, in the future supply you with a reconstruction of what your agreement looked like but generally Citi just supply terms and conditions which mean very little

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much for your reply and clariication.

 

Do I need to send them the dispute letter from the library or do I just ignore them now until/if I hear from them again?

 

Your choice. I tend to let them know that I know the situation rather than just waiting for them to comply

  • Confused 1

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I'm sorry for the delay caused by house repossession and my wife being diagnosed with cancer in the last few weeks.

 

I sent the "account in dispute" letter on the 29/06/11 with a proof of delivery on 01/07/11.

I received the attached in reply. Some of the dates appear to me to be strange and wonder if they prepared this before I sent the dispute or after? Either way, please will someone help me with the following questions?

 

Q1. They say they have complied with my request but have they sent the corect information?

 

Q2. Page 2 (dated 15/06 says they have fully complied and will not enter into any further correspondence. Can they do this? The rest of that section just appears to be T&Cs

 

Q3. Page 8 (dated 21/06 appears to be a copy of the section referred to in Q2 but with a different date. Any ideas what this might be about?

 

Q4. Page 14. This is stated to be a copy of the agreement. However, there are no dates or indeed anything to indcate that it wasn't plucked out of thin air by someone , eg signature, acceptance. Is this in fact acceptable?

 

Q5. Page 25 shows this was requested on the 21/06 but then page 26 shows a statement date of 29/06. Is this relevant to whether this was processed before or after my dispute letter or an irrelevant detail?

 

Please, any help and assistance I can be given will be appreciated as I really am getting drowned by everything going on and not sure which way to turn anymore :(

 

Thank you

NGAC

CitiCard CCA response 3 - anonymous.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

A bump for you.

 

As far as I'm aware, the recon can satisfy a sec 77/78 request, but is still of no use in court, they will have to produce the original.

I have a letter from Citicard stating that they do not have my agreement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...