Announcements
-
-
Tweets
-
Posts
-
T911, Nick, thanks, I got there in the end! Without boring you with the details, it is precisely the most ridiculous cases that end up being lost - because the Cagger knows the other party's case is rubbish so doesn't do the necessary work on their own case. G24 are well aware of double dipping. They have either done it deliberately or else have cameras which can't handle multiple visits to the car park which G24 happily leave malfunctioning so the £££££ keep rolling in. Sadly most people aren't like you. I've just read various reviews for the Retail Park on TripAdvisor and Parkopedia. Virtually all of them are complaining about these unfair charges for daring to spend time & money shopping in a shopping centre. Yet no-one is refusing to pay. They moan but think they have been fined and cough up. G24 are unlikely to do court, but it's not impossible with two tickets. Try to get evidence that you were elsewhere at these times. Often retail parks will intervene, but I've Googled & Googled and cannot find an e-mail address for the place. Could the manager of one of your favourite shops give you a contact e-mail address for the company that run the retail park? Right at the moment I'm supposed to be teaching someone who runs two shops at the local shopping centre, but I'm not as he has had to go to a meeting with the company that runs the shopping centre, so I know for a fact that these business relationships exist!!! -
Afternoon DX, The files were in date order. How would I put them into an acceptable format? I'm not that pc literate. -
Yes, it should, well spotted HB!
-
By Man in the middle · Posted
I think you need to tell us what actually happened. Your original post gives the impression that you were taken to court for a speeding offence. But you go on to say that you received no paperwork. So you could not have been summonsed for a speeding offence because the police had no evidence that you (or anybody else) was driving (and it seems you were not anyway). You were probably summonsed (or more likely received a Single Justice Procedure Notice) for "failing to provide the driver's details." You would not normally be banned for this offence if you were convicted - it carries six points. So did you have any earlier points which meant you were liable to a "totting up" ban? If you were originally convicted (as it seems you might have been) how was that conviction set aside? Did you perform a Statutory Declaration? There is simply too much missing for any meaningful help to be given. It seems as if there may have been an error by the DVLA but before you consider suing those idiots until the cows come home, you need to explain exactly what has happened. -
Point 4 and 10 duplicate Point 5 and 8 duplicate Try to keep to one para with regards the agreement...various paras duplicating the same. Statement of truth is out of date refer to the claimants statement
-
-
Recommended Topics
-
-
Our picks
-
If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,
If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.-
- 1 reply
-
-
Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld
ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,
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
-
-
A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report
WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,
Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299-
- 161 replies
-
-
Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available
BankFodder posted a post in a topic,
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
-
-
-
Recommended Topics
-
Vodafone Default Notice ** SUCCESSFUL OUTCOME ** :)
style="text-align: center;">
Thread Locked
because no one has posted on it for the last 3684 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
-
Recently Browsing 0 Caggers
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Have we helped you ...?
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS
Recommended Posts