Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The dealer is MK autos ltd in Milton Keynes.   We know the car was serviced by bmw once, as we called to ask but about 2 years ago.  The car was brought for £10,995 but with finance cost total will be £22,000.. Eye watering amount but again we was pushed into a corner. I needed a car my mum has terminal lung cancer and I do all the hospital appointments. We thought that we would be safe for a while at least.   Again I forgot to mention that although the car had a "service" the rear brakes went and were replaced on the 15th June 2019..   We have paid so far in total £2260 in 6 months.   I am prepared to fight this!!  
    • What is the name of the dealer please? I'm afraid that you seem to have managed to miss certain important landmarks. If a defect occurs within the first 30 days then you are entitled to a refund or a replacement at your option. Unfortunately you didn't assert this short-term right to reject and so you have lost the opportunity. After that, if a defect occurs within the first six months then you have the right to insist upon a repair and if the repair fails then you are entitled to a refund or a replacement at your option. Unfortunately you haven't taken advantage of this. The dealer has claimed that a warranty has expired. It has nothing to do with warranties and in fact warranties tend to be extremely misleading because they tend to lull you into a sense that you have no other rights. This is not true. Under the Consumer Rights Act you are entitled to have a vehicle which is of satisfactory quality – given the price, age, and other relevant factors – and that it remains in a satisfactory condition for a reasonable period of time. On the basis of what you say it seems to me that the defects are serious enough to render the vehicle not of satisfactory quality. However, you are dealing with a dealer who is clearly unhelpful. I don't know why you haven't told us who he is – but you should do. You have taken out finance and although you reached out to the finance company at an early stage, they declined to get involved. They gave you a reason and it seems that you accepted this reason even though you don't seem to understand that the finance company has no friend of yours. Your interests are in conflict with theirs. Under section 75 of the consumer credit act, the finance company is liable to exactly the same extent as the dealer is. The chances are that you may have to take one or other of them to court. You certainly need to be prepared to do so and be prepared to threaten it in the hope that someone will put their hands up – but if they don't then you will go ahead with your threat. Don't bluff. You haven't told us how much you have paid for the vehicle. Also, have you sought an independent quotation for the repair work? On the basis that the dealer is probably going to remain uncooperative then you are probably looking at several months before this is sorted out. The way to deal with it will be to be extremely assertive and aggressive and we will help you if you have the will to do it.  
    • Quick update since it's been 4 months now - they never responded to the letter I sent and the case got passed onto Zinc. They try to phone/text me probably once or twice a week, I have never responded though. Blocking the number doesn't help, seems like they have an endless supply of disposable numbers which is a bit annoying, but whatever 😑. They also send me the occasional email reminding them that I "owe" them money too. I've never received any physical letters.   That's pretty much it. For anyone who came across this post because they're in a similar situation to the one I was, there is absolutely nothing to worry about. Just ignore them. These people are powerless. They'll try to contact you endlessly and it's a tiny bit annoying, but eventually they'll bugger off. Nobody will show up at your door. Your credit score won't be affected. Their whole business is based around trying to intimidate vulnerable people into paying money that they don't owe.
    • It depends from a lot of factors: 1. Is the timing chain a serviceable item, even by visual inspection? 2. At around 50k miles i would expect the manufacturer to step in for a snapped chain. IMO they shouldn't break on an almost new engine. 3. Was the car sold as fsh? From main dealer, vat registered garage or backstreet/tesco car park mechanic? 4. Did the chain break inside the 6 months?
  • Our picks

tomtubby

BPA confirms that Civil Enforcement Ltd are under "investigations"

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2090 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

The following is a link to an excellent press story featured today regarding the frankly pathetic shambles of private parking enforcement and proof once again that "cowboy clampers" have indeed turned into "cowboy ticketers" .

 

The article also states that apparently POPLA are struggling with appeals and that DVLA have made a fortune from selling personal data.

 

As you will also see, BPA are confirming that CEL are under "investigation" for their failure to abide by the BPA's "recommendations" by capping the maximum charge of their tickets at £100 !!!

 

Only a few days ago local authorities were stunned by the surprise joint Press Release from DCLG and the DfT regarding the plans to curb CCTV cameras because of the damage that was being done to the high street by the excessive ticketing of motorists by local authorities.

 

There can be no doubt that DfT will be putting "private parking companies" under investigation ( if they are not already doing so).

 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2442223/Private-spy-cameras-used-tickets-clamping-banned-private-land.html

Edited by tomtubby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The following is a link to an excellent press story featured today regarding the frankly pathetic shambles of private parking enforcement and proof once again that "cowboy clampers" have indeed turned into "cowboy ticketers" .

 

The article also states that apparently POPLA are struggling with appeals and that DVLA have made a fortune from selling personal data.

 

As you will also see, BPA are confirming that CEL are under "investigation" for their failure to abide by the BPA's "recommendations" by capping the maximum charge of their tickets at £150 !!!

 

Only a few days ago local authorities were stunned by the surprise joint Press Release from DCLG and the DfT regarding the plans to curb CCTV cameras because of the damage that was being done to the high street by the excessive ticketing of motorists by local authorities.

 

There can be no doubt that DfT will be putting "private parking companies" under investigation ( if they are not already doing so).

 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2442223/Private-spy-cameras-used-tickets-clamping-banned-private-land.html

 

just a shame nothing serious will happen but a slap on the wrists and business as usual

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to read ha ha

 

I dont trust the BPA very much because it is made up of top heads from the very companies trying to fleece us

 

I wonder if they will publish the outcome and then go after PE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it the BPA are unable to FORCE their AOS members to cap the tickets at £100 because; if they do impose such a "cap" they could be on the receiving end of legal claims from their members of "price fixing" under the Competition Act !!!

 

Did the BPA let Parliament know this when they lobbied so hard for keeper liability under PoFA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I understand it the BPA are unable to FORCE their AOS members to cap the tickets at £100 because; if they do impose such a "cap" they could be on the receiving end of legal claims from their members of "price fixing" under the Competition Act !!!

 

Did the BPA let Parliament know this when they lobbied so hard for keeper liability under PoFA?

 

Nationwide licensing may well be an option with genuine pre estimate of loss and complete transparency of calculation forming part of the terms and conditions.

Granting of a license should also require full disclosure relating to the applicants

Dimentions of signage and lettering could also be prescribed

Additional signage compulsory within retail outlets reminding shoppers of the time limitations when using the car park.

Invoices issued should not resemble REAL PARKING TICKETS issued by local a authority or Police.

 

This approach would give local authorities control (where the BPA fail) in the same way as they have with taxis, window cleaners and various other activities and also generate increased income from the fees.

Edited by Crocdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The entire private parking enforcement is frankly a total shambles.

 

Schedule 54 has been on the statute books for exactly ONE YEAR and even today; neither DVLA or the BPA have any idea as to whether the charges imposed by AOS members represent a "contractual loss" or "damages for breach" etc !!!

 

If this is not serious enough, when submissions were made to Parliament back in 2011 regarding banning of private clamping, one submission warned government that the regulations would NOT in fact ban clamping on private land as BAILIFF companies ( and anyone contracted by the landowner) could simply circumnavigate the regulations by merely relying upon the "ancient" right under what is known as "Damage, Distress, Feasant".

 

The Home Office IGNORED the advise and exactly one year after Schedule 54 was incorporated into PoFA we now have BAILIFF FIRMS setting themselves up as "agents" and issuing parking tickets at a face value of £300 each !!! Well done PROSERVE !!!!

 

Oops.....nearly forgot the best bit. The companies doing this "apparently" are not required to be AOS Members and can instead apply to DVLA for keeper details under the guise of "reasonable cause" .

 

Honestly....you couldn't make it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The entire private parking enforcement is frankly a total shambles.

 

Schedule 54 has been on the statute books for exactly ONE YEAR and even today; neither DVLA or the BPA have any idea as to whether the charges imposed by AOS members represent a "contractual loss" or "damages for breach" etc !!!

 

If this is not serious enough, when submissions were made to Parliament back in 2011 regarding banning of private clamping, one submission warned government that the regulations would NOT in fact ban clamping on private land as BAILIFF companies ( and anyone contracted by the landowner) could simply circumnavigate the regulations by merely relying upon the "ancient" right under what is known as "Damage, Distress, Feasant".

 

The Home Office IGNORED the advise and exactly one year after Schedule 54 was incorporated into PoFA we now have BAILIFF FIRMS setting themselves up as "agents" and issuing parking tickets at a face value of £300 each !!! Well done PROSERVE !!!!

 

Oops.....nearly forgot the best bit. The companies doing this "apparently" are not required to be AOS Members and can instead apply to DVLA for keeper details under the guise of "reasonable cause" .

 

Honestly....you couldn't make it up.

 

My earlier post is merely a suggestion as we recognise the serious problems with this iindustry in England and Wales, the infomation gathered from the south is currently being collated in order that all interested parties can be fully informed prior to the BPA turning up in Scotland.

 

We are fortunate in as much as we don't have Bailiffs and of course Sheriff Officers in Scotland cannot act without authority from a court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea why the UK government did not follow the example from Scotland years ago and BAN clamping. In Scotland it was considered a form of BLACKMAIL !!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, the time lapse was incredible

 

The Judge in the case of Carmichael V Black described clamping as extortion and Fraud as far back as 1992.

 

I also understand that more recently the BPA have failed to make any progress when trying to have the regulations surrounding POFA introduced in Scotland. The constant bad press and horror stories surrounding their members activities in the south has been extremely helpful in convincing MSPs that this industry should not be encouraged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...