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

Help with log book loans can the bos be voided under section 9/10


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4581 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

 

Could someone please offer me some advice, I had my car taken by log book loans about a week ago and on my bill of sale (or at least that's what i think it is) has been signed by the person that issued the loan....so does this mean that the BOS is invalid and if so how do I go about contesting this with them??

 

Sorry I have posted this on another thread but didn't get a reply.

 

Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
read paragraph 3 AND 4 again

 

then paragraph 94

 

then paragraph 102

 

they are talking out there backsides

 

also

 

the court thrEW out there whole case on the 17 auguest and found for the oft

 

ime just waiting for the transcript to be released

 

Tell me if I am wrong, but from reading the judgement sam1986 linked to above, it would seem that LBL did win the attestation issue on appeal by a majority decision with Judge Levenson dissenting. Hence the paragraph:

 

"We unanimously give permission to appeal to theUpper Tribunal against that part of a decision of a First-tier Tribunal, madeon 21 December 2010, which dealt with what has been called “the AttestationIssue”. By a majority (Judges Howell and Turnbull, Judge Levenson dissenting)we allow the appeal, set aside the First-tier Tribunal’s decision in respect ofthe Attestation Issue and re-make the First-tier Tribunal’s decision byanswering that issue in the negative: that is, a bill of sale is not renderedvoid by the circumstances posited"

 

They did however find that BOS's might well be void for other reasons, they are not void for the attestation issue. Para 102 that postggj refers to was the dissenting Judges decision and not the majority.

Link to post
Share on other sites

has anything been released from 17th august yet...seems to be taaking a while for anything to be released ..

As it stands at the minute they can still take my car cant they ?? if the judgement from july was in favour of logbook and nothing else has been confirmed

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All

 

We all wait anxiously for the latest appeal hearing outcome to be made public...

 

Here is the current status of thier licence held at OFT:

 

Licence Number:0512966

Licence Status:Current

Current Applicant / Licensee:

 

Business NameCompany Registration NumberNine Regions Limited4286387

 

Public Notices:

 

StageDateDocument LinkEvent TypeDate of ReceiptNotesAppeal to First Tier Tribunal18/11/2009Revocation17/03/2009 Determined To Revoke16/10/2009Revocation17/03/2009 Minded To Revoke13/03/2009Revocation17/03/2009

 

It is now 2011, and this has been going on since before March 2009.... so, I have sent a quick email to the main contact at the OFT to see if we can get any more detail to share right now.

 

Clearly, whilst their licence is showing as 'current', LBL can continue to trade - so, it would be most unwise to assume otherwise.... caggers just need to stay vigilant, because, they are still practising as previous on all accounts.

 

Hope this helps?

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All

 

I've had a response back from the OFT... which is :

 

"We are still waiting for Judge's written findings on LBL and hopefully they will be published in the next few weeks. Keep an eye on OFT's and Tribunal's websites"

 

so there you have it caggers........ not too long to wait now : )

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I need to know whether Log book loans can still enforce the bill of sale despite the judgement not being in public domain? I'm sure my bill of sale is void on account of the attestation issue. Just want to know whether I can use this against them at the moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi all

 

i feel it is important to post the exact truth regarding the court cases and the attestation issue as not to give people false hope.

 

logbook loans lost their first tier tribunal case back around november 2010,

there was five reasons,

 

one was the attestation issue, they appealed and it was dealt with in july 2011,

the appeal judges ruled that the attestaion issue was a substantive issue and of due importance to be dealt with seperately,

 

they did win on a two to one majority!

 

the case on the 17th august one poster refers to is the overall case for logbook losing their licence,

they did lose and we are waiting for the written judgement.

however this is a totally different issue!

 

the attestaion issue was of significant importance to not only logbook,

but to all lenders using bill of sale legislation, of which there is many.

 

The case can be found on BRITISH CASE LAW.

 

Bills of sale are valid on the attestation issue regardless if the agent signs and witnesses the loan,

one poster did mention that they may be not valid for other reasons,

 

i read no note of that in their judgement online,

but off course they are not valid if proper procedure is not followed,

this is what he may be referring to.

 

i hope this clears up this issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...