Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good evening, My husband and I are looking for some help regarding a faulty car which we have recently purchased from Big Motoring World Enfield. The details are as follows: - Make - Nissan Qashqai 2017 1.2L milage 55,349 miles.  Date purchased -   01/06/2024 Price paid - Deposit £9000, finance £4794 (this includes the 3yr Nissan extended warranty), buyers fee £249.      Total including all fees etc = £ 13794.        Initially, during the test drive, there was no problem with the car at all and this is why my husband bought the car on the day. No problems on the way home from the dealership and up to three days after purchase, the car drove smoothly. However, after day 4, occasionally we would feel a slight shudder during some gear changes (automatic car). Over the next few days these shudders worsened and then on day 5 the car would make very a very loud shudder with every single gear change. It was at this point we contacted Big Motoring World for advice as we are still under the 14 days no questions asked return.  My husband contacted BMW for advice on 06/06/2024 and stated the problems as above. He spoke to a sales person who informed him that he should only take the car to a Nissan dealership (we have now been told that this is false information). We were also promised that a courtesy car would be provided for us after the fault on the car had been identified and confirmed by their mechanic fixing the car. We took the car to the garage that Big Motoring World had told us to go. Upon arrival there we discovered it was a third-party garage, not Nissan. We took the car to the garage on day 9. The mechanic ran a diagnostic test which found no faults, but after the test drove the car and below are his findings...   we scan the car but no faults with the gearbox showing but when I test drove the car it was really juddering and jumping.I spoke to my auto transmission specialist and he said they are very common on these as the CVT belt starts jumping within the box due to pressure loss.  We had this vehicle in for diagnostics for gearbox mate but both the gearbox and battery are faulty.Gearbox supplied and fitted comes to £3500 plus vat   Where we are at now…. My husband spent all of day 10 (11/06/2024) making phone calls between the garage, Warranties2000 and Big Motoring World. He tried, unsuccessfully to find out if the diagnostic reports had been shared between all three. Everyone kept saying the report hadn’t been received and yet the garage assured us it had been sent. Eventually we were told that the courtesy car would be given to us if it was deemed the works to fix the car would take longer than 8 working hours, and that decision would be made after 48hours of receiving the report. Today is day 11 and no decision has been made as nobody is telling us any decisions as people are off sick or on holiday! Today we called the garage and told the mechanic NOT to start any work as we will be returning the car. He said none have been started and we have left the car in his storage as he has deemed the car undrivable. I have sent an email to BMW now formally stating that we want to return the car and I have used the terminology that was suggested.   What can we do next?   Thank you everyone. .  
    • Yes will do thanks Dave, I wonder what will happen at the preliminary hearing no idea what they will ask I assumed once I sent the proof they asked for about my sons condition that I would have just  been given the go ahead to be Litigation friend
    • First the judge will rule on you representing your son, which will be a doddle. After that the full hearing date will be fixed, with WSs exchanged 14 days before. So for the moment just concentrate on getting the right to represent your son.  
    • Thank you, the mediations in a couple of days so hopefully they show up this time. I'll update this thread after how it goes
  • 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

The FoTL Twaddle Thread


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3877 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

SO WHY IS THERE A DEFAULT BUT SIGMA ON MY CREDIT FILE ?????:mad2:

Because you did not pay your bill and the provider defaulted the account and sold assigned it to Sigma which then quite correctly up dated the file with their details. SIMPLE!!!

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

As you are so wise and knowledgeable why are you coming here for advice that you take no notice of??

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

What does that mean?

 

FOTL = Freemen of or On the Land a sadly delusional faction that believes that they have no liability for their debts or actions, and foolishly state that if a debt purchaser pay a creditor for an account the debtors liability for the debt is extinguished dangerous and misleading twaddle.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

FOTL = Freemen of or On the Land a sadly delusional faction that believes that they have no liability for their debts or actions, and foolishly state that if a debt purchaser pay a creditor for an account the debtors liability for the debt is extinguished dangerous and misleading twaddle.

 

Interesting however I am a 53 year old insurance broker with a stack of monthly bills that are paid on time like most other normal people.

 

I just believe when a large organisation carry on charging after the end of a contract then sell the alleged debt to a parasite debt collection agency I should have the right to say no.

 

I can guarantee I will win as I am in the right despite all the snide and smug comments I have received on here.

 

I came on here as a genuine person asking for help and everything I have said is from other people who have tried to help me, be they right or wrong.

 

I will let you all know how I get on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are no such comments here all that has been stated on the theories of FOTL is correct.

 

As is the advice given on the transfer of rights obligations and benefits of accounts sold on to a debt purchaser.,

no one questions you right to challenge the debt purchaser/DCA or the original creditor all that has been stated here

and explained is the process and the facts of the sale and purchase of debts, l

 

ike it or not when an account is sold on the debt purchaser inherits the rights,

obligations and benefits of the account,

the debtors liability is NOT extinguished by the sale, simple explanation no frills no daft theories.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are no such comments here by myself,

the information on FOTL is factual as is the advice on the sale and purchase of debts,

and the 'inheritance' of rights, obligations and benefits of an account sold on to a 3rd party by a creditor.

 

Your personal insults are totally unwarranted and I must say that if the advice you have received is from an advocate of the FOTL faction then you are being sadly misled.

 

No one especially me would deny anyone the right to challenge a DCA but any such challenge should not be based on delusional theories that have absolutely no merit and have been repudiated by a court.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

fotl twaddle moved to its own thread

 

thank you

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can guarantee I will win as I am in the right despite all the snide and smug comments I have received on here.

 

Now THAT is something i would love to see. Care to state the legal argument and case law upon which you will be relying in the high court in order to win?

 

The simple fact is, ( and you wont like it), if you try any of this FOTL stuff in a court, you will be laughed at, you will lose the case, and most likely incur heavy costs in addition to the debt you tried to evade.

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

Now THAT is something i would love to see. Care to state the legal argument and case law upon which you will be relying in the high court in order to win?

 

The simple fact is, ( and you wont like it), if you try any of this FOTL stuff in a court, you will be laughed at, you will lose the case, and most likely incur heavy costs in addition to the debt you tried to evade.

 

My post above has all the answers you need and in particular this line.

 

I just believe when a large organisation carry on charging after the end of a contract then sell the alleged debt to a parasite debt collection agency I should have the right to say no.

 

The original debt was incurred because T-Mobile carried on charging after the contract finished that is why I will win the case. No twaddle just a fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No one would argue that point, but the way to challenge it is NOT the misguided rubbish spouted by afcm1 which should be totally ignored.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way you would be able to object to a transfer of obligations from a creditor to a collection agency will be a tripartite assignment based on Novation. That is all rights, duties and obligations are transferred.

 

Assignments of obligations are transferred under the Law of Property Act 1925. When you take out an agreement, a term is inserted into the t&c allowing the creditor to sell the debt if he wishes to a third party.

 

YOU AGREE TO THAT TERM when you sign and execute the original agreement.

 

So for people to object later on is a non starter as you have already given your express consent to any possible transfer or sale of the contract to a third party, such as a collection agency

Link to post
Share on other sites

On a more positive note, you are well within your rights to put a 'Notice Of Correction' on your own Credit File (free of charge) if there is a dispute regarding the default. This gives future creditors the chance to read your reasons to object to such default, and should not affect your credit rating in any way (especially if you have other financial commitments that are all up to date).

 

 

If all else fails, kick them where it hurts and SOD'EM;)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My post above has all the answers you need and in particular this line.

 

I just believe when a large organisation carry on charging after the end of a contract then sell the alleged debt to a parasite debt collection agency I should have the right to say no.

 

The original debt was incurred because T-Mobile carried on charging after the contract finished that is why I will win the case. No twaddle just a fact.

 

You wont win a case. You might get those charges removed, (keyword = MIGHT) but you wont get the debt written off.

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

You wont win a case. You might get those charges removed, (keyword = MIGHT) but you wont get the debt written off.

 

You should be careful not to prejudice your case, it will need to be approached calmly and presented properly.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so that poster understands, judges pretty much laugh at FOTL arguments. I don't think i've heard of one that has actually succeeded on a legitimate debt.

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

Hi, I have watched a few vids of rob menard/dean c and a few others, and found them to be interesting and thought provoking. I have also heard those "gurus" specifically state that there should be "honesty in contracts" and "legislation is not law". So I'm a little confused why a true FOTL follower would try to use far fetched and baseless reasons to get out of honouring a debt.

The many legitimate statutory failures would normally be enough to see off many a claim anyway.

 

I would also just like to touch on the subject of using "old" laws to circumvent current legislation, in my experience a good/clever/modern lawyer will reference "old" laws to support his case in court. I suspect this is an everyday occurrence. The oldest case brought to the attention of a judge (in a claim against me) was 1838 and in relation to promissary notes. It didn't work that time!

 

I believe there is an "element" of truth in what these "gurus" preach. If that element of truth is the "hook" to reel-in the vulnerable, then I see no real difference between a "guru" and our morally superior and upstanding politicians and their manifestos!.

 

(All generalisations are false, including this one)

 

All the best,

 

Bill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A lawyer can reference whatever law he likes. If a newer law supercedes it, like it does in pretty much every single FOTL case, then they are useless and need to find another profession.

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

Not really. As the judge should know about it, and even if the lawyer won, thats what appeals are for.

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

So if a lawyer presents an old case in support of his clients claim and wins, despite there being a more recent judgment/law that superceedes the original, the loser can appeal (if he chooses). Nevertheless, the old/superceeded law was victorious, despite a newer law.

 

If an apparent FOTL follower presents an old law here (on cag) is there always a newer law?

Has there ever been an instance of an apparent FOTL follower having a legitimate argument, when quoting an old law?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. Pretty much every FOTL argument relating to debts has been shot down in the high court.

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

I believe that the true ideology of FOTL was never about debt avoidance, it was more about not being enslaved to a "society" that cares not for its citizens.

 

"FOTL" has been somewhat hijacked by the desperate to avoid their legitimate and enforceable contracts, when their true remedy (if any) lies in the contracts and the associated legislation that governs them.

 

Cheers,

Bill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It might not having been the true ideology, but thats debt avoidance seems to be how it is now.

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

You know me,love a good argument but on this one there is little to argue.

 

Every debtor has the right to ask the creditor to prove the debt.

 

As to who placed the default depends on the date of default. I believe an account can be assigned prior to default.

 

I believe that most mobile phone contracts or contracts of this type may have a fixed term but also provide for it turning into a monthly rolling contract with the notice period as stated. If that can be argued on unfair terms i have no idea but i suspect not.

 

IMHO debt avoidance is a very emotive word. It suggests hiding from a debt whereas in reality it is often because the creditor can not get processes and legal requirements sorted or because the debtor has nothing to give.

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...