Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
  • 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 
        • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Car craft


geth5
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3655 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

After opinions/advice.

 

The wife went to carcraft on Sunday and has bought a car,

she's got a rather terrible deal,

paid 3000 over the top for it and

then due to some historic missed payments the finance she has got is poor, over 5 years she'll pay back 19000 for an 8500 car.

 

When she's come back and

I've had a look at the paperwork and been horrified, it's sunk in and she's wanted out.

 

Saying well you get 7 days to return it, the line from the salesman was

"you can return it within 7 days as people change their mind",

so I've went to return it and they've then said well actually it's a 7 day exchange,

where you can swap it for another car even if it's cheaper, they then rejig the finance,

but you either take the car you bought or another one, there's no return.

 

I did a bit research and pointed out that I had formed the opinion that there is a legal argument

that the salesman has made a verbal misrepresentation of a key term of the contract

and this is a breach of the unfair trading regulations 2008.

 

In discussion they've then showed me a sheet of paper with a typed list on which they read out to her at the time

and they pointed to where it says "7 day exchange" or "7 day exchange policy" I can't now remember.

 

this document is unsigned and she didn't get a copy, she accepts it was read out and didn't ask any probing questions.

The salesman said that bit I quoted about "you can return it within 7 days" when he read the 7 day exchange point to her,

he never said exchange or swap, he said return .

 

I have checked the other docs she got which is an order form and a finance agreement,

no mention at all on the exchange or return point.

 

I have then pointed out that what the wife has understood it to mean was,

she can bring the car back and get the one she part exchanged back, deposit back etc.

she took some comfort in this, in that if she got a bad deal, it didn't matter cos shed just bring it back.

 

I have also said that that 7 day exchange part is a term of the contract, it's unclear and as such if it's unclear, it's unfair.

So I said there's a valid claim under the unfair contract terms act too.

 

Their crack was well we can swap the car otherwise go and take legal action if that's how you feel.

 

To do some damAge limitation incase I lose at court,

I am swapping the car for the cheapest they have which will reduce the loss as I see it by half,

cos the cheapest one they have is 4000 grand less than the one she's bought.

 

I plan on filing at civil court for the two reasons mentioned and seeking damages of them taking the car back,

refunding any payments I have made,

paying us the value of the part exchange and

paying any penalties to the finance company.

 

The justification I feel for those damages is this,

that is the position I would have been restored to had I been able to invoke the "return" clause we thought we had,

because of what was said by the salesman.

 

Please note I, we, she has been used somewhat interchangeably, it'll be my wife whose bringing the claim.

 

The initial purchase was her doing, the attempt to persuade them to let us out of it was mine.

 

All thoughts welcome, but I'll be honest,

we don't really need the "well what did she take the bad deal for" input,

and finally sorry for the lazy grammar and structure,

I wrote this on an iphone in the bath, it's semi SMS typing

Edited by geth5
Doesn't read right, bad grammar
Link to post
Share on other sites

hi welcome

 

can you please use the edit post icon

at the base of your post above and add some blank lines

and sentences

 

thank you

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok I think we can sort this

 

we have a very good carcraft rep here

 

I've alerted linzi

 

i'm sure she will make contact tomorrow.

 

on a side note.

 

I take the agreement was signed on premises so no 14 days cancellation rights?

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

no they are a good idea

 

we find them very useful in dealing with issues

 

those that don't get dumped.

 

if you wish

 

its simple to see how many threads have been reolved by them if you wish

 

just use our search in the top grey toolbar

 

carcraft rep

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Carcraft Customer Service Manager

Hi,

 

I have spoken to our customer services team and they have tried to get in contact, they have left a message on the land line and mobile phone.

 

If you can get back to them, they can help out with this issue.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Update,

 

rang the above number and they were closed for bank holiday weekend,

 

by chance the finance company rang to take direct debit details and

 

the wife said well fine but I don't want the finance.

 

To her surprise they said well that's fine well just cancel it and you can return the car.

 

I then rang carcraft who said they'd have to ring their finance department and

 

when we rang back they'd yielded and had to take it back.

 

Oddly enough it was the same manager who said they don't accept cars back.

 

2 weeks later they've got their car back,

I took it back that day.

 

They've provided 3 different dates my part exchange car will be back

and then whenever we ring they just give another date.

 

They've also twice said they'd refund our deposit and that's still not been done.

 

The situation is improved but through our own efforts rather than a single bit of help from carcraft,

it's like pulling teeth or getting blood from a stone.

 

Take your pick on the analogy :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Carcraft Customer Service Manager

Hi, Sorry to hear this has yet to be fully resolved. I have passed this on to Customer Services at Head Office to investigate as soon as possible for you.ThanksLinzi

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...