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

Pothole claim problems

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4171 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 hit a pothole back in August which damaged my tyre and wheel resulting in me having to purchase a brand new wheel and tyre.


I reported the pothole, and got a reply that the hole did require attention.


Once I had my car repaired I sen the council a claim form along with photo's of the hole and damage to my wheel.


And I'm pretty annoyed right now as this is the reply I received from the council legal department:


(I had to take a photo of the letter as I have no scanner right now)


Page 1



Page 2



Could someone out there in the know point me in the right direction to go with so?



Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you aware that the pot hole has existed for a while? Is it in a residential street where you could possibly ask locals to confirm the condition of the road? They say that the area was previously repaired on 30th July so at least they acknowledge that there was a problem. But a lot can happen to a road surface repair in a month, particularly if it was a typical 'patch up job'.


If you are able to establish that the pot hole hasn't 'just appeared' and you have photo evidence backed up by other evidence, then you may have a case to pursue the matter in the small claims court. But if you do obtain such evidence, they seem to be inviting you to send it to them first.


Please Note


The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.


I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.


Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.


Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical Council 'go away little man' letter. I would be sending them another similar to the first and quoting their replay but headed 'Letter Before Action'. It will only cost around £35 to bring an action.


If you can get more evidence as in Sailor Sams post, then even better.


It can be done on line. Have a read, but don't threaten if your not prepared to go through with it.



Link to post
Share on other sites

You would need to scan copies of the inspection records for people to look at as these are where your claim would succeed or fail. If there is a reasonable system of inspection the under s.58 the Council will have a defence.


As has been mentioned if you can get witnesses to give statements that the particular pothole in question that caused the damage was there prior to the last inspection and nothing was done to fix it you may have a chance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could look on Google Street View for evidence of the pothole. The date the image was taken is at the bottom left of the screen, which may help to establish if it's been there over a long period of time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could look on Google Street View for evidence of the pothole. The date the image was taken is at the bottom left of the screen, which may help to establish if it's been there over a long period of time.


There are pot holes there at the edge of the road in the same place my car got damaged, but the google images are from 2008.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Devils advocate (from experience) questions below



Did you require recovery from the road where the pothole exists ?


Did you retain proof from the recovery company ?


How much was the replacement tyre ?


How much was the replacement wheel ?


Did you buy new or second hand ?


Have you kept the orignal tyre and wheel for inspection ?


Is it a BMW ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...