Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 160 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

Temporary diversion sign blown into my car - Can I claim using MCOL?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3862 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

You need to issue a Letter of Claim first, by recorded delivery, stating that you have reason to believe MU were responsible for the safety of the site in question, and were negligent in not doing all that was reasonably practicable (using your document any anything else official that you can find, particularly HSE Approved Codes of Practice) to secure the safety of the site to the public for the prevailing conditions, and that this failure allowed the wind to blow a sign into the path of your car in such a way that you could not safely avoid it, and that this caused £X of damage to your car as demonstrated by enclosed copy receipts. Include all relevant information that you intend to rely on in your claim.

 

Offer them 28 days to settle the damage, failing which you will issue a claim in the County Court for damages plus your reasonable costs (MCOL fee plus your time at a prescribed hourly rate, or possibly more if you are losing otherwise paid time to do this).

 

Since the first course of action of most companies is to deny liability, your first response from them comes as no surprise. When they see that you're serious, they might admit liability and try to negotiate.

 

Or they might call your bluff, deny liability again or just ignore you, and wait for you to file your claim so they can enter a defence.

 

At this point they can also demand any evidence you intend to rely on, and you must provide it quickly. Hopefully you have strong evidence that they were responsible for the site, because otherwise your claim is weakened.

 

It's a pity you didn't get your insurer to do all this because for a no-fault claim, your premium would not have changed much, although I understand your fears as they all too frequently don't do their job properly!

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...