Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello, firstly thank you for reading this. I know no one wants a long winded back story. So I’ll be breif. I entered a local store to buy some paint (which I did pay for) I am honestly not a bad person or a theif.   Didn’t have a basket or trolly as was on my lunch break. Whilst picking up the three tubs of paint placed some masking tape in my pocket (it was hanging out of so I had every intention to pay) just didn’t have a hand free. Paid for my goods (forgot about the £4.39 masking tape) I’ve got so much going on and im not well at all (like I say no one cares I get that) also have autism so wasn’t thinking particularly like others do maybe (who knows my minds going around and around) I left the store after paying, was pulled back in by security. Asked for the tape which I gave immediately  shook up. Gave them my ID and details. I was given some paper and told to expect a large fine in the post for their time and the tape and sent on my way. my questions are: I hardly ever go out without support so the ban I guess I can’t go there now for anything (their loss) - ok but is my photo going to be all over with my name? how much am I expecting in the post as a fine? I have sent them cash in the post recorded signed for delivery to arrive tomorrow (incident happened today) for my error. Their Address was on the bit of paper. i have read two posts on this page but they were from many many years ago so I hoped for updated advise please? 
    • V important you read lots of BMW threads too !  
    • So should I send them a new SAR and put my date of birth on it? Or do I need to send them some proof? Driving license? 
    • Thanks so much for your help!! I've emailed them, and when they reply saying they can't do it I'll reply and state my rights. I'm so glad I found this forum, and will read all of the posts I can find and help guides available for the future. Really can't thank you enough.
    • utter BS, doesn't matter you signed it. pers i'd be writing as per the other threads here rejecting the car as not as described under CRA etc and be done with it. as its a debit card you could also do a full chargeback within 120 days to your bank and simply dump the car back to BMW. 100's of like threads to read here. get your ducks inline. make sure you know what you are doing and off you go. dont take any BS from BMW, no matter what you sign it does NOT remove your consumer rights. p'haps it might be on the off chance you are a good manager , a quick phonecall tomorrow saying you dont want it because (no bla bla fitted) it might be resolved in 5 mins..i will guess to date you not tried
  • 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

driving without due care


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3980 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

Hi

interested in comments of an incident.

 

My 17yr old grandson was passing a row of slow moving traffic approaching a roundabout

 

when one of the cars turned right into a cul-de sac,

 

without any indication or obviously checking their mirrors

 

causing my grandson to collide with the car throwing him over the car and hitting a wall.

 

When the police arrived he was put in the police car to say using bullet answers as to what he thought happened

and was as we found out later charged with this offense even though he cannot really remember what was said in the car.

 

We have had no contact with the police officer until the summons came through 4 weeks later

 

surely the PC should have contacted him at home and taken a proper statement from him

 

bob

Link to post
Share on other sites

To get thrown 'over the car' probably means he was outside a cage, to be summonsed probably means it most likely a motorcycle (possibly a quad), though one can get nicked for due care on a bicycle, it is rare.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wondered because there was something in the paper a few months ago about a pedal cyclist being considered to be, I think, 25% responsible for the accident because they were riding at speed overtaking on the outside when a car turned right. I think in that case the car had a larger vehicle behind it so couldn't see much behind them until they started to turn.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my own opinion, be it this person was a motor cyclist, or pedal cyclist, they have to follow the highway code and be considerate road users

 

Their is no provision for a cyclists to be moving on the outside, or the inside (kerbside) of stationary traffic unless there is a dedicated cycle lane or bus lane in which a motorcyclist or pedal cyclist is allowed to use.

 

The cyclist should wait in line for the traffic to start moving like every one else AND HAVE MORE PATIENCE

 

Just my opinion

Link to post
Share on other sites

he was on a motorcycle who according to his instructor told him he could ride alongside slow or stopped traffic if it was safe to do so

 

If it was safe to do so ........

 

You have his side of the story to go on.

I don't know the car driver's story, but (considering the prosecution!) what if the car driver said something along the lines of:

 

"Slow moving traffic on single lane road, I signalled to turn right, checking my mirror"

"I started my right turn and the motorcyclist and my car collided"

 

Was there another car behind the car that turned (possibly obscuring your son's sight of the turning car's indicator)?

If so, have they given a statement??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Filtering is legal.

 

And it's okay to filter if you do so with care. You can't just zip along the outside of slow moving or stationary traffic. You need to take care passing each individual vehicle.

 

A lot of my work is with people who have been damaged in RTAs, and getting knocked off a bike can often result in permanent paralysis. Everyone on a bike needs to drive defensively, because in an accident with a car or van the bike will always come off worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Filtering is legal provided it's done carefully. The Highway Code acknowledges this and says "when filtering in slow-moving traffic, take care and keep your speed low" (Rule 88) The motorcyclist has a duty to take care, keep a close eye on the traffic ahead, and be ready to stop if someone pulls out. The motorist has a duty to consider the possibility that there may be motorcyclists filtering, and to check that it's safe to pull out before doing so. It's quite possible for them both to negligent in their respective duties and therefore both be guilty of careless driving.

 

There are numerous cases, eg here, which show that there's no hard and fast rule that it's always the motorists fault or always the biker's fault - it depends on the particular circumstances. Note that those cases concern civil liability rather than the criminal offence of careless driving, but many of the principles are the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm,what this kid has done,Ive done myself on a motorbike! coasting along at the side of the cars,right up until some one pulls out turning,he was lucky he wasnt badly injured,I dont think most people use their indicators,in that situation would most people think bike? he was very lucky,Ive known a few people who have been badly injured like that especially if you are coasting up the inside and you get a lorry turning left! hopefully he will be alot more careful regards no indicators and even if indicators are on,if you are sat at a road junction trying to turn right and a car is coming,indicating left,dont pull out,he might have forgotten to cancel the indicators!,at the end of the day you are going to get injured on a bike in any accident whether its the bikers fault or not

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever happens this time at least he'll be more cautious in future and that may save him from a very nasty accident.

 

One of the saddest things I've ever seen is wards full of beautiful boys in their teens and 20s at Stoke Mandeville Hospital. One of my loveliest clients was knocked over by a van and is paralysed from armpit level down. He was 22.

 

Please tell your grandson to always be very careful.

 

DDx

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...