Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Bookmakers use betting on political events to entice new customers, and say it is growing.View the full article
    • nope  and  neither dx
    • Ok Thank you DX will do just that . will keep you up dated.
    • dispute it with whichever cra provider is now showing it. simply state the a/c is from 2015 and was defaulted (date) and should not have re appeared. probably getting ready to sell it on. dx
    • Hi Caught Shoplifting at John Lewis - Retail loss Prevention/Other shoplifting allegations. - Consumer Action Group Thanks a lot for commenting this experience of yours. I do understand this might be something that you are not willing to talk about anymore but the same exact scenario happened with me today at John Lewis. They took my name/ address/ a picture of me holding a signed banned letter. the only questions I've got are... will I be contacted by the police will this be recorded as police caution or criminal record?  I would really really appreciate if you could let me know how it went.  I am so so so ashamed of myself and am really making changes in my life I feel like I've lost myself for a period of my life but anyways it would be really great to hear back. Thanks 
  • 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

Buildings insurance re subsidence


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4126 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

My mother claimed on her insurance for subsidence. They monitored for a year then redone her outside drains, filled in cracks in a few rooms redone a bit of brickwork outside and redecorated some rooms. (no underpinning done) About 4 yrs later my partner noticed cracks opening up. My mother rang ins company and they wouldn't send anyone out, just told her to get a builder to look at it and let them know. As she is in her 70's she got a builder neighbour/friend to look and he said it looked ok. The ins co sent her a letter saying 'as you haven't contacted us we believe you have no problems and are closing this matter' or words to that affect. She is trying to sell the house now and the survey pulled up a problem and the prospective buyers got a structural engineer out and they said it has subsidence again and should have been underpinned last time! Mother phoned ins co and they say she has to pay £1000 excess again. Surely the ins co are at fault here?

Edited by homeowner45
Link to post
Share on other sites

My mother claimed on her insurance for subsidence. They monitored for a year then redone her outside drains, filled in cracks in a few rooms redone a bit of brickwork outside and redecorated some rooms. (no underpinning done) About 4 yrs later my partner noticed cracks opening up. My mother rang ins company and they wouldn't send anyone out, just told her to get a builder to look at it and let them know. As she is in her 70's she got a builder neighbour/friend to look and he said it looked ok. The ins co sent her a letter saying 'as you haven't contacted us we believe you have no problems and are closing this matter' or words to that affect. She is trying to sell the house now and the survey pulled up a problem and the prospective buyers got a structural engineer out and they said it has subsidence again and should have been underpinned last time! Mother phoned ins co and they say she has to pay £1000 excess again. Surely the ins co are at fault here?

 

The problem is whether this latest damage has anything to do with the original problem. If you have a structural engineers report done or borrow the buyer and this confirms it was related, then contact the Insurers who dealt with the original claim. Ask to speak to a manager or subsidence claim specialist claims handler. If you can fax a copy of something from the structural engineer to the claims handler, then they can arrange to send someone out and start the ball rolling. If it is agreed that this is the original problem coming back to haunt, then there will be no further £1000 excess. The Insurers will then take advice about the works that will be required. Sometimes works don't start straightaway, as there may be a need for monitoring first. This may stop the sale of the house, as the buyers won't want to buy a house, where there are unknowns. e.g extent of damage/works required, affect on the value of the house. If the buyer needs a mortgage, their mortgage company probably won't lend now anyway.

 

The Insurance company will be responsible for inadequate works, if they contracted the works or paid the contractors. If your mother some how took over the claim and sorted out the works herself, then the Ins co. will not be responsible. I doubt that the latter would the case, but just added to make sure this was mentioned.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

She is still with the insurer that sorted the work last time, they said it would be guaranteed if she kept with them. They are still insisting on the £1000 excess at the moment, hoping we can claim that back if it is proven to be their fault. The ins co are sending someone out in the morning to look at it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...