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

Tax credit review letter-childcare

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4395 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

A fortnight ago I received a letter asking for my childcare invoices/receipts/contract. I am luckily able to provide all of these once the nursery give me new copies.


I am slightly concerned as to why I have been selected for a childcare review. Are these really 'random' checks, as the letter tries to say, or is there a more systematic way of selecting those to be reviewed/checked. The letter has made me feel already as if I have done something wrong. Quite an accusing tone, and leaflet explaining about fines etc if you are found to be in the wrong. I know that I have claimed childcare legitimately, but its almost as if the 'compliance officer' seems to already think, for whatever reason, that I have already commited a crime, or fraud.


Following on from this, am I going to have to give bank statements/p60/payslips/utility bills, etc, as I have read that some people have had to provide. Why do some of us need to provide only child care related paper work, and then others have to provide bank statements etc.


Im quite a worrier and since recieving the letter I have been unable to sleep, have booked extra time off work etc, as Im worried sick.


Is it likely that I am due a more thorough examination?

Edited by Jennie_d
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jennie and welcome to the forums.


I am sure our resident experts will be along to advise soon.

It the meantime have a look around the forums for similar threads.

Here is one to be going on with http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?303503-Im-seriously-up-the-creek-Tax-credit-childcare-fraud-review!-Please-advise

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou, just had a quick read through, and I see others have had the same, really hope it doesnt take ages though for them to make a decision. Thank god I will no longer need to childcare element next year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...