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 3972 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts



I have read through a number of existing threads on your site outlining similar experiences to mine ( cannot include the links here as I have no previous posts). Unfortunately I did not see them before I sent my phone to cash4phones. Regardless, I have taken your advice and have written a LBA which I attach here. Your assistance in this matter would be very helpful (NB I'm in Scotland where I understand the court proceedings are slightly different).



[Your address]

[supplier's address]


Reference: Order ID xxxxxxx

As it has not been possible to resolve this matter amicably, and it is apparent that court action may be necessary, I write in compliance with the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct.


I had a black iPhone 4 16GB telephone in pristine condition and obtained a valuation from Cash4phones online for £113. In this basis, I sent the phone in to Cash4phones, carefully wrapped in bubble wrap. Upon receipt, Cash4phones offered £39.16 explaining that this reduced price was based on “Speaker Or Microphone not working” and “Moderate wear and tear” which is a clear discrepancy to the actual condition of the phone sent in. I asked Cash4phones to return the handset which Cash4phones refused sighting. sighting expiration of the 5 day limit.

The telephone was sent in pristine condition.


From you I am claiming a full repayment as initially outlined and valued on the Cash4phones website, in the sum of £113.


Listed below are the documents on which I intend to rely in my claim against you:

- similar complaints involving Cash4phones on the internet


In accordance with the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct I would request that you provide me with copies of the following documents:

- all communication (email, via Cash4phones online contact form, etc) between Cahs4phones and myself


I can confirm that I would be agreeable to mediation and would consider any other system of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in order to avoid the need for this matter to be resolved by the courts.

I would invite you to put forward any proposals in this regard.


In closing, I would draw your attention to section II (4) of the Practice Direction which gives the courts the power to impose sanctions on the parties if they fail to comply with the direction including failing to respond to this letter before claim.

I look forward to hearing from you within the next 14 days.

Should I not receive a response to my letter within this time frame, then I anticipate that court action will be commenced with no further reference to you.

Yours sincerely,




Again, your advice and feedback in this matter would be very much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I have had the same problem I sent off my iPhone 4 in a bubble wrap envelope as I didn't trust the flimsy envelope they sent me I waited 5 days and heard nothing so yesterday I emailed them requesting an update then at 10pm last night we got an email and first of all it came up headed Fraud [problem] with this company - further down the email said due to cosmetic damage they would only offer me £109 not £137 I had 5 days to accept or reject if I reject it would cost me £8.95 my husband then read all these nightmare stories. So at 9.03am after waiting 12 minutes and ready for an argument the bloke answered the phone I told him I am rejecting their offer I am not paying £8.95 and I am coming in person to collect my phone back he said okay. I got to their offices in Bounds Green and found their offices and after 5 minutes wait I am now back in possession of my phone - if anyone lives in London area go and collect in person - hope all ends well like mine. - Elaine Jones

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...