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

BT hackers bill 'WON'


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6409 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

With the enthusiasm i had from this site,i sent another letter to British Telecom

regarding a hacker who put an unnoticed auto dialler on my computer and i had a bill for £73.81.The original letter was sent in Feb 2005 and my second was 16/10/06.

To my amazement on the 20/10/06 i had a phone call from INDIA,i for obvious reasons could hardly understand what he was saying, but i got the gist that they had my letter and were going to credit my 'telephone account' with the cost + my compound interest @ 9.9%.I said i wanted a cheque!

I mentioned compensation and they offered £25,i refused that and asked for £50.We will come back to you Monday they said.

Today,two people phoned and said my 'bank account' would be credited with £150.41,so ha may be i am getting double! Not a massive amount in this world,but every little helps.

Here are the letters i sent,may be good for a template (the first one) in the future,loads of people must have had this happen to them in the past.Good luck guys and dolls issued

2 cc,s today Barking Mad Barclays and shAbbey,i will let you know what happens in my other thread.

Here are the letters

 

 

BT UK Customer Billing,

BT plc Correspondence Centre

T.V.T.E.,Gateshead NE11 0ZZ

s,

22nd Feb 05

 

Dear Sirs/Madams,

the charges on my telephone bill,copy enclosed,amounting to £73.81,

are the result of an illegal use of my computer and constitute the proceeds of fraudulent

activity by an unknown party.Your insistence on the collection of this money may amount

to an attempt to obtain property by deception,which is a violation of section 15 of the Theft

Act 1968.It is additionally illegal for you,under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to handle

tranfer, or arrange assets derived from criminal conduct.By doing so,you may be in violation

of sections 327 (Concealing etc),328 (Arrangments) and 329 (Acquisition,Use and

Possession) of criminal property.If you do not immediately refund me these charges levied

against me i will file a formal complaint against you with my local police.A copy of this

letter,along with the necessary documentation to support my claim,is also being forwarded to

my member of parliament.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

 

 

16/10.2006

BT UK Customer Billing

BT plc Correspondence Centre

T.V.T.E.,Gateshead

NE11 OZZ

re;account no:WM tel no:01527 computer line only

 

Dear Sirs,

I wrote to you on 22/02/2005,yes 2005 with the enclosed letter.

I am very dissappointed that a major utility company as yourselves have failed to reply.I find this conduct utterly despicable and shall report the conduct of this matter to the OFT,ICSTIS, Otelo and Oftel.

I have since reported the matter to the West Mercia Constabulary,at the Police Station,The Crescent,Bromsgrove,B60 2DF,on the 16/10/06.The incident number is

I would draw your attention to the terms of the contract which you agreed at the time that i opened the account.It is an implied term of the contract that you conduct yourselves lawfully and in a manner that complies with UK law.

The illegal charge that you charged was £73.81.As i have an overdraft

situation,from 13/07/2003 date till the present day at 9.9% annually,then the compounded interest is £26.60,giving a Total of £100.41.

I require full payment of this money,and if you do not comply fully in the next 14 days,i shall begin a County Court claim against you for the full amount plus costs,without further notice.

Yours faithfully,

If you think this helps click the scales!!!

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/site-questions-suggestions/53182-cant-find-what-youre.html#post436526

click my scales if you think i am helpful ! yes LHS down there !!

Once more into the breach dear friends,once more

or close the wall up with our banks dead ,

The games afoot,follow your spirit and upon this charge

Cry 'God for Harry' England and St George

Henry V battle of Agincourt 1415

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the answer to that dear friend by your sarcastic retort is that are,t your bank charges your responsibilty?

The idea of this site i s to help to recover illegal charges.

This charge was illegal as set out in the above letter.

My responsibilty was that i had a firewall etc,to protect my computer.I was sent a bill for a charge that i personally had not incurred.When i enquired who was the user,i.e. the website that incurred the charge,they (BT)could not (or would not)provide me with that information,

I suppose it is a bit like some one stealing your car,if you had locked it then you have done your best to secure it,and the insurance pay up.B.T.was my insurance.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/site-questions-suggestions/53182-cant-find-what-youre.html#post436526

click my scales if you think i am helpful ! yes LHS down there !!

Once more into the breach dear friends,once more

or close the wall up with our banks dead ,

The games afoot,follow your spirit and upon this charge

Cry 'God for Harry' England and St George

Henry V battle of Agincourt 1415

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sarcasm was never implied or intended.

 

I note your comparison, but fear that it is flawed.

You see, the difference is bank charges are imposed by the offending banks.

 

Unless ofcourse you are suggesting that BT are the people who 'hacked' your computer?

 

Congratulations on your win.

 

On another note, most 'porn diallers' as they are called in the industry are not related to hacking, but are often downloaded via spyware, by simply browsing webpages.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a similar experience a number of years ago when "someone" racked up nearly £250 of call charges to several numbers in the African continent.

Mostly they were at 3 or 4 min the morning. Fortunately one call was made when I could prove that the house was locked and empty.

I closed the account and switched to cable. When I asked them to prove I had made the calls and that they had been made from my property, they couldn't or wouldn't.

Never heard from them again.

Any electronic system is open to hacking. BT know this and won't push it especially where the usage appears abnormal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...