Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Post #415 you said you were unable to sell it yourself. Earlier I believe you said there had been expressions of interest, but only if the buyer could acquire the freehold title. I wonder if the situation with the existing freeholders is such that the property is really unattractive, in ways possibly not obvious to someone who also has an interest in and acts for the freeholders.
    • i dont think the reason why the defendant lost the case means anything at all in that case. it was a classic judge lottery example.
    • Hello, I will try to outline everything clearly. I am a British citizen and I live in Luxembourg (I think this may be relevant for potential claims). I hired a car from Heathrow in March for a 3-day visit to family in the UK. I was "upgraded" to an EV (Polestar 2). I had a 250-mile journey to my family's address. Upon attempting to charge the vehicle, there was a red error message on the dashboard, saying "Charging error". I attempted to charge at roughly 10 different locations and got the same error message. Sometimes there was also an error message on the charging station screen. The Hertz 0800 assistance/breakdown number provided on the set of keys did not work with non-UK mobiles. I googled and found a bunch of other numbers, none of which were normal geographical ones, and none of which worked from my Luxembourg mobile. It was getting late and I was very short on charge. Also, there was no USB socket in the car, so my phone ran out of battery, so I was unable to look for further help online. It became clear that I would not reach my destination (rural Devon), so I had no choice but to find a roadside hotel in Exeter and then go to the nearest Hertz branch the following day on my remaining 10 miles of charge. Of course, as soon as the Hertz employee in Exeter plugged it into their own charger, the charging worked immediately. I have driven EVs before, I know how to charge them, and it definitely did not work at about 10 different chargers between London and Exeter. I took photos on each occasion. Luckily they had another vehicle available and transferred me onto it. It was an identical Polestar 2 to the original car. 2 minutes down the road, to test it, I went to a charger and it worked immediately. I also charged with zero issues at 2 other chargers before returning the vehicle. I think this shows that it was a charging fault with the first car and not my inability to do it properly. I wrote to Hertz, sending the hotel, dinner, breakfast and hotel parking receipt and asking for a refund of these expenses caused by the charging failure in the original car. They replied saying they "could not issue a refund" and they issued me with a voucher for 50 US dollars to use within the next year. Obviously I have no real proof that the charging didn't work. My guess is they will say that the photos don't prove that I was charging correctly, just that it shows an error message and a picture of a charger plugged into a car, without being able to see the detail. Could you advise whether I have a case to go further? I am not after a refund or compensation, I just want my £200 back that I had to spend on expenses. I think I have two possibilities (or maybe one - see below). It looks like the UK is still part of the European Consumer Centre scheme:  File a complaint with ECC Luxembourg | ECC-Net digital forms ECCWEBFORMS.EU   Would this be a good point to start from? Alternatively, the gov.uk money claims service. But the big caveat is you need a "postal address in the UK". In practice, do I have to have my primary residence in the UK, or can I use e.g. a family member's address, presumably just as an address for service, where they can forward me any relevant mail? Do they check that the claimant genuinely lives in the UK? "Postal address" is not the same as "Residence" - anyone can get a postal address in the UK without living there. But I don't want to cheat the system or have a claim denied because of it. TIA for any help!  
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Notice Of Intended Prosecution - I was 240 miles away **RESOLVED**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4088 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

I've received a notice of intended prosecution from Surrey Police for doing 71 in a 60 zone in Puttenham, Surrey at 11.32. The problem is, I was 240 miles away decorating my daughter's bedroom, in York, with my dad. The car registration on the paperwork is mine. The car make (Seat) is correct.

 

I have evidence of where I was 2 hours later in the form of a debit card payment and receipt (we took our girls to The Chocolate Story in York - well worth a visit in case you're wondering).

 

I'm assuming that the reg has been entered manually, and incorrectly, and "the allegation is supported by means of photographic/recorded video evidence" according to the notice. So I'm confident it'll show a different car.

 

Not sure what to do though or how to go about dealing with this. Can anyone offer any advice please.

 

First Direct - Settled in full 01/07

Capital One - Settled in full 06/10/06

MINT - Settled In Full 30/08/06

HSBC - Settled in Full 15/12/06

Barclays - - Settled in Full 29/11/06

Morgan Stanley - Settled In Full 03/10/06

MBNA - Settled In Full 23/09

American Express - Settled in Full 30/11/06 via bailiffs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have they sent you a photo? This could be a clone, or more likely, as you say, that the VRM has been misread.

 

I would suggest that you phone them ASAP and explain that at the time your vehicle was in Yorkshire on that day, and that you can prove this as required. They should be able to look up the details and hopefully confirm that you shouldn't have received the NIP. If they are adamant that the details are correct, then the next step is to report that a clone of your car is driving around Surrey and respond to the NIP with a letter to explain that 1. It was not your vehicle and this can be proven, and 2. That you have reported the matter as appropriate.

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the advice. They didn't send a photo unfortunately. If it is a clone, do you know if I'd report this locally to North Yorkshire Police or to the Surrey lot?

 

First Direct - Settled in full 01/07

Capital One - Settled in full 06/10/06

MINT - Settled In Full 30/08/06

HSBC - Settled in Full 15/12/06

Barclays - - Settled in Full 29/11/06

Morgan Stanley - Settled In Full 03/10/06

MBNA - Settled In Full 23/09

American Express - Settled in Full 30/11/06 via bailiffs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Local would be fine, but might also be wise to phone DVLA as well. Don't do it until you are sure that they recorded the number correctly though or it could get complicated.

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Understood. Thanks again, and I'll keep the thread updated in case it's of any help to others.

 

First Direct - Settled in full 01/07

Capital One - Settled in full 06/10/06

MINT - Settled In Full 30/08/06

HSBC - Settled in Full 15/12/06

Barclays - - Settled in Full 29/11/06

Morgan Stanley - Settled In Full 03/10/06

MBNA - Settled In Full 23/09

American Express - Settled in Full 30/11/06 via bailiffs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a call from Surrey Police Camera people to say that they've reviewed the photo and that the reg plate was read incorrectly. Feel like a t**t for the panic, but when you see the police letterhead, your mouth just goes dry. Biggest relief is that it's not been cloned.

 

Thanks for all the advice.

 

First Direct - Settled in full 01/07

Capital One - Settled in full 06/10/06

MINT - Settled In Full 30/08/06

HSBC - Settled in Full 15/12/06

Barclays - - Settled in Full 29/11/06

Morgan Stanley - Settled In Full 03/10/06

MBNA - Settled In Full 23/09

American Express - Settled in Full 30/11/06 via bailiffs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Feel like a t**t for the panic,

 

Shouldn't feel bad at all under those circumstances. the only person* that should feel like a t**t should be the guy who couldn't even read a number plate correctly off the photo.

 

*Should have gone to specsavers!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't feel bad at all under those circumstances. the only person* that should feel like a t**t should be the guy who couldn't even read a number plate correctly off the photo.

 

*Should have gone to specsavers!

Guy? Of course the registration numbers are checked by a real person and not just left to OCR software... aren't they? :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Great News

 

I think a Formal Complaint to Chief Inspector may be appropriate for being falsely accused due to Surrey Police Maladministration that they intended to proscecute you and CC letter to your Local MP and send them a copy of your letter.

Edited by stu007

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

A complaint still needs to be made so it doesnt happen again.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...