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
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4081 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

As a former LA HO of 30 yrs experience, I can only tell you how this is going to pan out Matt. You may not like it but this is how it is.

 

The HO has a duty to ensure that all tenant/leaseholders within that block are able to have "peaceful quiet enjoyment of their tenancy" or such like.

 

Where there are several flats in a block and one person has a washing machine on at night, although it may sound quiet enough to you, it is actually ricocheting throughout the building. Depending on the design of the building, and the positioning of each flat, each tenant will hear a different level of noise. Directly under you probably thinks his ceiling is coming in.

 

The HO has spoken to you, as she must when a complaint is received. She has told you that, although you didn't realise it, your machine on at night is causing a disturbance. Now she expects you to comply with the request not to use it late at night. If you carry on, she can serve you with Notice of Seeking Possession. And she will get her evidence by getting environmental health to install noise monitoring equipment in the complainants flat. The noise levels will be monitored for say 3 weeks. If EH consider there is a problem, they will issue you with a "Noise Abatement Notice". A copy goes to the HO, and there is the evidence for NOSP.

 

Now, I am not saying anything about the rights and wrongs of the case here, everyone will have a different opinion I suppose. I am just telling you what happens next if you continue to use that washing machine at night, having been asked not to.

 

The best bet is to pop downstairs to the neighbour and apologise and try and reach a compromise. And there the problem ends. A shame your neighbour didnt tap your door and explain the problem to you, none of this would have been necessary then.

 

I hope you get it sorted. You all have to live in close proximity to each other after all, and its better to get on.

 

Couldn't agree more, compromise is best way forward rather than arguing makes everyone unhappy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...