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

Additions / Very / Shop Direct - Unfairly sold Deb t- Complaint?

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4512 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

I have had an additions catalogue for years and years, last year due to my partner being made redundant I could no longer make the required repayments. I kept up the repayments for a couple of months (hoping that a new job would be found) but then contacted all my creditors and advised them of the situation. They were all pretty understanding and I asked for help from one of the debt management companies, unfortunately due to their huge workload it was going to be several months before I could get an appointment - I again told all my creditors of this, gave them my reference number and told them of the date of my appointment.


Additions I have to say were the least pushy of all my creditors, very few letters, no phone calls etc.


Meeting took place and after a few weeks, and only when I enquired, was told it would be at 6- 8 weeks before they would even look at my secondary debts, I contacted one of these companies and they advised they had not been written to by the debt management company. So I decided to deal with it myself.


I contacted all my secondary debtors (x3 credit card and 2 x catalogues) Put together a top level financial statement (using the initial "gumf" of what a court would class as reasonable each month and to ensure all were treated equally figured out what money I had left to split between them all - this equated to an offer of payment of 0.5 %.


All credit cards and the one other catalogue accepted the payment by me over the phone and agreed no charges or interest. On the 19th January when i rang Very / Shop Direct they said they would require an offer of payment and full financial statement in writing and this would be required by 3rd February (giving my 2 weeks and one day).


I wrote the statement and letter and posted my next day delivery to ensure it got there for the 3rd, but today received a letter from Lowell's saying the debt had been sold to them on the 27th January. Wanting to know why Very had sold the debt BEFORE the date they told me. I rang up asking if they had received the letter of offer of payment, they said they had but not until the 6th February. I know they would have received it on the 3rd as I sent because I sent by next day delivery and have the proof of this. I was told they receive thousands of letters each day (as far as I am concerned this isn't actually my problem - they should allow for that and not me). When I asked when it was sold I was told the 28th January (so only one week after I phoned them and different to the date both they and Lowells have put in writing). When I asked why it had been sold in January when I was told I had to get the financial statement and letter in by the 3rd - prior to the date I had told it would be sold, I was told "Perhaps they got fed up of the non payment". I put the phone down in disgust at this point.


I know it wont make any difference to me now... the debt is with Lowell's but I am absolutely fuming that they did not even give me the opportunity to get a financial statement and offer of payment to them and don't think they should be able to get away with blatantly lying to their customer.


My question is: Is this a matter that I can complain about to the FSA for unfair treatment - I know I will have to make a formal complaint to Very about first - but there wont be any point in that unless I can take it further.


Thanks for reading.

Link to post
Share on other sites


I feel you should complain first to very and then when you have exhausted their complaints procedure, you go to the FOS


As for the Leeds Losers. YOU tell them what you will pay, not them tell you. If they don't like it, ask them to take you to court. that tends to shut them up

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...