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

Parking Charge Notice (Speculative invoice #1) from Excel


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4377 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

Threatening letter #1 received on the 19/01/12 demanding £60 rising to £100 if not paid in 14 days.

The letter titled Parking Charge Notice was sent by Excel for parking in an Iceland car park for 23 minutes. (I managed to spend over £100 in the store in this short period).

 

After reading the very useful information on this site I will be ignoring any correspondence from Excel or DCA and updating this thread accordingly.

 

I've noticed other posts mention contacting, local councils, MP's, ICO, DVLC and land owners as a valid course of action. I'm keen to do likewise and think my first action should be to advise Iceland's CEO of the loss of my £3k annual spend. Any suggestions or pointers to templates would be appreciated?

Edited by deswa77
Link to post
Share on other sites

Speculative Invoice #2 received from Excel Parking today, it was issued 21 days after the Parking Charge Notice. As expected this intimidating letter titled ‘Notice to Owner’ states intent to issue court proceedings. The unjustified charge has now risen to £100 with the threat of an additional £30 court fees and £50 solicitors scale costs + 8% interest. Both letters now appropriately filed under junk in the vain hope that Excel may act on their claimed intent, I would be so lucky J

I won’t be contacting Excel but plan to write to Iceland’s CEO and his PR advisor pointing out the flaw in their business model which is allowing legitimate customers to be intimidated by business partners.

Iceland owned by Baugur

Malcolm Walker, Chief Executive

malcolm.walker@iceland.co.uk

01244 842221 / 07836 552200

Keith Hann, PR adviser

kh@keithhann.com

01244 842228 / 07831 521870

I would appreciate any guidance on content of this letter and also if I have identified the correct contacts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure on the contacts (there is a site called CEO contacts, if you Google). Why not wait for some more letters first? You may get some even worse ones from Debt Collectors or even a pretend Solicitor? The flaw you are pointing out to them is that the letters are baseless in law. Point out that under civil law they cannot fine anyone, nor can they pursue anyone other than the driver, however they have harassed the Registered Keeper. Also, under civil law, the redress for breach of contract is limited to a genuine pre-estimate of actual losses only. In a free supermarket car park, their losses are zero, but they are harassing the RK for £60. And how come their actual losses appear to rise from £60 to £100? They can only be one or the other, not both. They are clearly a contractual penalty which is unenforceable under civil contract law. There's probably loads of other stuff under Consumer Laws as well, wait for others to chip in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Speculative invoice #3 received from Excel today, titled 'Final Demand Notice'. There are several errors and contradictions in this notice and I think my 12 year old son could write a better extortion letter. The wording is now more intimidating/direct with words like 'intent' and 'may' removed e.g. "Final demand prior to court action", "Failure to pay this notice will result in court proceedings being taken" Unless Excel has changed it's processes their next action should be to send the toothless DCA and solicitor letters so it will be interesting to see if the next letter actualy relates court action, I hope so!

 

I still plan to contact Icelands CEO highlighting Excels unjustified intimidation of it's customers but I'm waiting for the threatening DCA and solicitor letters first. Maybe I should include my estimations of revenue/costs associated with this issue;

 

Iceland -£480 (revenue)

Excel -£5.50 (DLVA costs and a conservative £1 per letter cost)

Me £0 (Actually i've saved £9 on petrol this week as Morrisons gave me a 15p off per litre voucher)

Edited by deswa77
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are adding a great job.

 

When you write to the CEO (and I agree with the others wait until you have the full letter chain) point out to him all the times Excel have lost in court.

 

Easily found if searched. I use http://usestealth.com/ now. I recommend it.

 

The reason I suggest this is he might just get rid of them when he sees how useless they are especially when challenged.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A better course of action is to contact your Local MP. ACS Law operating a similar model making over a Million pounds in the process before people power put a stop to it and landed the Solicitor in front of a disciplinary panel and getting Him struck off. The CEO of Iceland won't care about this, but your local MP will. The bigger picture is to make this whole process illlegal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

No further communication from Excel, it's been four weeks since I received speculative invoice #3.

Instrumentsofjoy, thanks for the feedback and usestealth link.

Scooby, I will contact my MP and the CEO but I need Excel to send more threats. I accept your point that Iceland’s CEO won't care about the loss of my £3k per annum spend. However, IF every customer threatened by Excel took their business elsewhere the CEO would care about the revenue loss.

(Was it really 'people power' that got Mr Crossley struck off for 2 years? I thought it was far more complicated than that ;)

Updated estimations of revenue/costs;

Iceland -£720 (revenue)

Excel -£5.50 (DLVA costs and a conservative £1 per letter cost)

Me £0

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...