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

Wow, sanction targets

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3856 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

this is what you get with a tory goverment, cameron and co will only be interested in something if it will benefit the rich. they cut services for the sick disabled poor and elderly just so they can't spend more money on themselves, then they'll expect everyone to just believe the lies they'll tell to cover up what they have done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a read!!!


I could well have been that mole!!!!


Totally true - all of it. I like the bit about being middle class, of a certain age and looking at suitable employment within certain professions. From experience it happens as it is printed.


However to be honest, you shouldn't just make the DWP/JC out to be the lone wolf in all of this.


In the government dept I worked in there were targets galore!! Some you honestly wouldn't believe. There was even a league table of regions then offices that could get the highest number of prosecutions, get the highest number of Bankruptcy Restriction Orders and even targets with league tables for lowly IPA's.

How was that done? You offer no help or advice on what a customer is entitled to deduct from his income, you simply ask what he thinks he should be allowed to deduct from his income to arrive at a surplus of income. Guaranteed to be £100's less than what he should be deducting. With the right advice he would have a surplus to pay to the OR of say £35 a week. Without guidance and advice you could probably screw £200 a week out of him.

I should know, our office was up there month after month at the top finding every opportunity of getting the maximum amount of money in. Our Dept actually made a profit every year and had to hand over the surplus to the mother dept - the Dept of Bus & Enterprise - when Mr Darling was the SoS which was permanently in the red with it's budget.


Targets = bonuses, the higher up the table you are, the bigger the bonus. It still happens in all government depts. - it's the only way to keep staff motivated after being told to do twice the work load for the same pay.


And dare any officer even suggest that they should be helping the public - not persecuting them!!!!


As for the public trusting the civil servants - at their peril!! Manipulation has been rife for many years now just as long as the end result is what you desire.

At one time they could be trusted - now - you play on the fact that the public have no real idea of their rights. I have seen written statements taken in an interview that bore little resemblance to what was actually said and where terminology and tense were changed to appear to give a totally different view. The customer is then asked to sign it confirming that it is a true and accurate record. In all my years I have never known anybody actually read back 10 pages of handwritten statement before it was signed.

Edited by boodletum
Link to post
Share on other sites

A very interesting article - and one we totally expected too. Typical DWP; let's not have official sanction targets so that we can truthfully deny they exist, rather let's have local internal sanction targets instead and keep it within the office.


The bit about them picking on the quiet and helpless clients rings very true, I've noticed the JC clerks speak much more politely and carefully to those who know the rules and won't hesitate to complain, which is why I'm always urging people to read up on their rights and not make themselves an easy target.


I think I'll print that article out and give my local JC a copy, might rattle a few cages.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also anyone who comes to sign who believe they are upper class, or lets say looking for work in certain sectors or area’s that jobcentre plus dont have expertiese in basically get a pass through the system until they find work


The class divide continues?


So the tip is to say you are looking for CEO work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...