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 
        • Thanks
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 162 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
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4484 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 claimed against a property agent for return of my 'non refundable' holding deposit in the small claims court. After mediation, which has failed, I have understood that the agent has three things points that he will make:

1. that I knew it was a non-refundable deposit

2. that he took the property off the market and 'lost' potential clients

3. that when he subsequently let it he had to accept £20 a week less in rent.


My points against these are:

1. I paid the deposit by phone, he emailed the receipt which revealed it was non-refundable if I did not take up the tenancy, but refundable (minus admin costs of £100) if he didn't accept me as a tenant. A biased, one-sided contract

2. From the time I paid the deposit, till the time I told him I would have to pull out he lost two business hours…which could not have possibly cost him £500.

3. That he later let it for £20 a week less is nothing to do with me, perhaps it was overpriced and I should have bargained.


I have looked at LandlordZone and OFT Guidelines on Pre-contract deposits. I don't think I have a problem with points 1 and 2, but they don't seem to have anything on point 3.


Any help would be much appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems he is arguing that he has lost money in relation to a verbal contract which is fine. However:


1. I would ask him for evidence of that - the thread below discusses this point (see "theycantdothat"'s post).

2. Legally that's little different to having a house "sold subject to contract" - there is no come-back on the potential buyer if they pull out due (also on the thread below) to the fact that till a contract is signed either party can pull out. And with buying and selling houses the potential losses are vastly greater.

3. Ditto with 2. Also, until you signed on the dotted line you continued to have a right to negotiate *all* the terms of the contract including the rent but also including a lot of things not listed in the description of the property that might have cost the LL more than £20 per week - eg. you might have wanted to move in a few weeks later than the LL wanted, or you might have wanted the LL to pay for a service contract if you'd later found out the agent was rubbish at repairing things and the LL lived in Timbucktoo etc. etc.




It's also worth pointing out that their "contract" as you found it when you received the receipt would be regarded as unfair according to the OFT because the admin fee was not refundable even if they declined you. Up to two hours to decide that you were not prepared to risk losing £100 sounds reasonable to me.





Be good to know how you get on with this because such cases don't come up much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Steve for your help. Point 3 is especially pertinent, that I have the right to negotiate terms till I sign the dotted line. I didn't think of that.


As an aside, I later found out that the guy I was dealing with at the agents was also the landlord of the property! In one of his 'Without prejudice' emails he told me that I wanted to make a claim to make it against him rather than the agents. I didn't listen to him of course, but isn't there a conflict of interest here? Does it have any bearing on my 'case'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a lawyer. I think that if you are suing an agency (even a company set up by the landlord) then they are distinct from the landlord, and normally it is the landlord you are suing (the agent acts for the landlord).


In this case though I'd have thought your beef is with the agency because it is the agency that holds the holding deposit and does the "admin" checks, not the landlord, and until you have a contract you have no relationship with the landlord and usually no knowledge of who the LL is.


I believe it is possible to add defendents to cases after they have been submitted. I guess you may have to do this if it becomes an issue. Having a judgement against both agent and landlord might be better for you of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...