Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Whatever the nuances of the law, they will be lost on OPS, who like the rest of the PPcs never bother to get planning permission, ever. When they get a new contract they don't want to delay issuing PCNs by deigning to follow the law, especially as the period when they take over and the parking restrictions are new is the time when they can catch most drivers out.
    • I had some contact with this company earlier in my working life but I'm afraid there's not a lot I can suggest that you haven't already done. During your grandfather's time  British Celanese was a subsidiary of Courtaulds. Courtaulds was subsequently (after your grandfather had stopped working there) acquired by Alzo Nobel. They in turn closed down the Spondon site and sold it. I have no idea what the number is that you are trying to call. It's a Derby (Spondon) area code but the number appears not to be allocated. From my slim knowledge of the history of the company I would have expected your grandfather's pension to be in the Alzo Nobel (CPS) Pension Scheme.  But Willis Tower Watson are the Pension Scheme Administrator of that scheme and would be the people who should know if your grandfather had contributed. Is your grandfather certain he contributed? Joining pension schemes wasn't compulsory in those days. Or might he have got his contributions returned when he left them? That happened sometimes back then. Sorry not to be of more help.      
    • I am sorry I am not aware of this report from IAS assessors? The Court will consider my application at a online hearing in June. The Court instructed me to send Bank copies of my sons condition proving he could not have been the driver I have heard nothing further. My son is not aware of any proceedings I have not involved him to avoid causing him distress, he has been sectioned a fair few times and I need to avoid this happening.
    • I am very pleased that the Court has taken the decision to allow you to  represent your son and hope that he is happy enough with that to relieve the stress he will also be feeling. I do agree that Bank parking are so insensitive, greedy, horrible etc etc to continue proceedings considering  in what it is a very minor case of a wrong number plate . Even their  own  IAS Assessors, who are normally hopelessly biased in favour of their members, went out on a limb and said  " The Operator's evidence shows no payment for the Appellant's vehicle, or anything similar. It does show two payments for the same registration in quick succession. I would take a reasonable guess, based on the circumstances described, that the person paying has paid for the registration of the person they assisted again." That is damning evidence and you must take that report with you as well as including that in your Witness Statement which we will help you with. I would expect that Bank would discontinue the case at that point.  But I am sorry to say  that you should not count on it.  
    • Evening all,   I have deliberated over this offer for two weeks and I have decided to take their offer. I do understand that some may prefer us to go to court and receive a judgement but with our personal circumstances and my current military commitment that could become an issue. I am so grateful for all the help and support you have all offered me over the last few months. I will continue to monitor this site and push all those that are being wrong to get in touch.   Thank you! what you all do is truly amazing!
  • 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

Kwik-Fit Aldershot MOT standards


FJA
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3883 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

Where do i start. Took my car in for MOT on 10/09, it passed which surprised me. This car is used by my daughter, so I need it to be road-legal.

 

The car arrived at 10:50, I left at 11:40. That is 50 minutes that the car was there. For 30 minutes of this 50 minutes, I was sat in the customer reception looking at the car sitting in the customer car park. So a supposed 45 minute MOT was completed in 20 minutes. Not bad going.

 

3 Advisories:

1. wipers in poor condition

2. general underbody corrosion

3. front exhaust blowing slightly

 

I knew the front tyres were questionable, so I stopped off at your Farnborough garage to check. Didn't tell them where I had come from. He told me that both fronts are barely legal, uneven wear and cracking on the outer wall - these are the original tyres, so 11 years old. Told him that they had just passed the MOT, without even an advisory, and he couldn't believe it. One of the rear tyres was also flat with a nail in it - I know this tyre has had a slow puncture for some time so this isn't new.

 

One of the front wipers was actually split - this is a failure.

 

Because of the corrosion, I took the car to my mechanic. We did a quick check of the car. Below are his findings:

 

1. front near-side side-light not working

2. front off-side wiper split

3. rear near-side tyre flat (10psi) with a nail embedded

4. both front tyres 1mm of tried, both un-even wear and cracking on outer wall

5. rear off-side wheel bearing noisy

6. off-side swivell housing deteriorating

7. 2 exhaust brackets snapped off - his 10 year son spotted this first whilst standing 5 feet away

8. downpipe corroded

9. corrosion on rear brake pipes

10. dampness around brake servo's

 

The underbody corrosion that was mentioned, we couldn't find it. Not even a hint.

 

In his opinion, the MOT provided by Kwik-Fit Aldershot isn't worth the piece of paper that it is printed on. He doesn't even believe that the car was put onto a ramp.

 

Not that I expect much to happen from this, the only cars I will be taking to Kwik-Fit for an MOT will be any wrecks that should really be put to salvage

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at it this way. You have passed the MOT with only advisories. Had it been done properly, you would have had a fail, plus details of everything that failed on the sheet, and having to pay now to get them all put right before you could have got the car back on the road.

As it is, you have the MOT pass and you can then fix the other things to get the car satisfactory.

I agree that Kwikfit have done a below standard job but it has worked to your advantage this time. Another time you will fail when perhaps a different MOT station would have passed you . Swings and roundabouts.

 

Does not sound like Kwikfit as they are usually pretty quick [or kwik] to extract as much money as possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad it passed, but if my daughter gets stopped today she would most likely be fined to two dodgy tryes which weren't even put down as advisories. The car is spending tomorrow with my mechanic to get most of the issue rectified, but if an MOT is supposed to state the your car is roadworthy at the time of the MOT, Kwik-Fit has totally failed in this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there,

 

We're sorry to hear about your recent experience at Kwik Fit. If you haven't already been in touch with us please e-mail [email protected] with the vehicle registration number and we will look into this for you.

 

Kind regards,

 

Kwik Fit Customer Service

[email protected]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi James,

 

We have received this and it has been logged and sent on to an area manager for investigation. Please be aware that it may take up to 3 business days for the area manager to get back in touch with you regarding this.

 

Kind regards,

 

Kwik Fit Customer Service

[email protected]

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad it passed, but if my daughter gets stopped today she would most likely be fined to two dodgy tryes which weren't even put down as advisories. The car is spending tomorrow with my mechanic to get most of the issue rectified, but if an MOT is supposed to state the your car is roadworthy at the time of the MOT, Kwik-Fit has totally failed in this.

 

You could always ask your daughter not to drive the car until the - almost - defective parts have been replaced.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the front wipers was actually split - this is a failure.

 

No, it's not a failure.

 

A MOT is does not mean that the car is roadworthy, it's just a check that in the opinion of the tester that the items tested meet the minimum standard. There are lots of non testable items which can (if defective) make car unfit for the road.

 

Measuring tread depths on tyres isn't as straight forward as you think as any grooves not cut as deep as those containing the wear bar indicators aren't considered as part of the tread and measurements can only be taken within the centre three quarters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...