Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I hope the Copper room has lots of space for the filing cabinets.    None of this in anyway smells funny at all l mean 68 company's with only some dissolved. 
    • @Man in the middle Thank you so much for the comprehensive information, this is super useful!    I'm just as confused as you, There were some other papers that he mailed back with his plea. I  read them, the officers statement was on there ... from what I can remember, the officer stated that my brother "had changed lane twice without giving proper time or indication" the papers did not mention speeding or anything else...    It doesn't help that the car he was driving (belonging to the mechanic) has a custom exhaust installed ... I'm not sure if this had anything to do with the officer being wound up... My brother said he "had it in for him" ... do you think the judge has seen the video? or is this judgment solely based on the officers statement?    Furthermore, My brother is adamant against a guilty verdict ... do you think that reduced the chance of this case being reopened?    As for the fine, they are already taking money from his universal credit which is effecting his life in a great way  
    • Looking at the sentencing guidelines, the sentence, on the face of it, seems harsh – and a little confusing. From your description the offence seems at the lower end of seriousness. There are three bands of seriousness mentioned in the guidelines. From the least serious, the suggested sentences are:   A fine of half a week’s net income, and 3-4 points A fine of a week’s net income and 5-6 points A fine of a week and a half’s net income and 7-9 points (or a disqualification).   The sentencing guidelines are here:   Careless Driving (drive without due care and attention) (Revised 2017) – Sentencing WWW.SENTENCINGCOUNCIL.ORG.UK     From your description I can see no aggravating factors to push the offence up from the lowest band of seriousness.   The sum he has been ordered to pay is based on the highest fine – a week and a half’s income. Let me explain how I have deduced this. As well as the fine, the court will also order prosecution costs (normally £90) and a “victim surcharge” of 10% of the fine. When the court has no information about a defendant’s income a default figure of £440 per week is used. So, he will have been ordered to pay 1.5 times £440, so £660 by way of a fine, £66 Victim Surcharge and £90 costs. Total £816, as per his notice. The fine indicates that the court viewed the offence in the top band of seriousness.   The confusing thing is the points. If the court considered the offence at the top of the seriousness range, he should have received at least seven points, not six. He has also been sentenced on the basis of a Not Guilty plea (which is again the default when no plea has been entered). This means he did not receive credit for his guilty plea. This is normally a discount of one third off the fine (but not the points).   So much for an explanation of what’s happened. What’s to do? He faces some considerable difficulty here because of the length of time elapsed between his conviction and now. His only option is to ask for a court hearing to have the matter reopened.   He should be aware that the court is not obliged to agree to this and may not do so in view of the time elapsed. When making his request he should do so on the basis that the sentence does not seem to comply with the guidelines on two counts: (1) he should submit that the offence is at the lowest end of seriousness and (2) the sentence is inconsistent with the guidelines anyway (discrepancy between points and fine).   He also needs to contact the fines office as a matter of urgency. I am surprised he has not already faced one of the sanctions they mention by now but he needs to let them know he is asking for his case to be reopened. Once again, in view of the time elapsed, they may continue with their normal enforcement process anyway.    If he had dealt with this promptly it is my view (provided the court sees the offence at the lowest end of seriousness) he should have face a fine of half a week’s net income, reduced by a third for his guilty plea, a 10% victim surcharge (minimum £34), £90 costs and three points. That is the ideal outcome he should be looking for but, as I said, the court may not agree to reopen the matter at all. If they do, he may find his full discount for a guilty plea is reduced due to his tardiness. Do let us know how it goes.
    • Agree with Trevor Kavanagh, that the UK cannot afford a Government that is totally split and unable to take the decisive action required.   Government should act on energy price rises by directly providing additional money to help reduce bills.  The £400 announced so far would not be enough.   Reduce the VAT on domestic energy to 0%.   Universal Credit and other benefits need to be increased back to the level provided during Covid as a minimum.   Fuel duties should be cut.   Offer incentives to use public transport by paying subsidies to bus and rail operators that they need to pass on, to reduce fares.    Urgent action required,  Cannot wait until September for emergency budget.    
    • You wanted Boris out and not to interfere in government until he left   Again, I wanted him to go immediately.
  • Our picks

Feel I've been mis sold Macbook Pro


plkinsey
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2904 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

Hi,I wonder if anyone could advise me please?

 

On Thursday, I purchased a MacBook Pro from PC World.

 

I inspected the display models, and saw one I liked. It was £100 more for the retina display model, and didn't really feel it was worth paying the extra, so paid £899 for the non retina display model.

 

When I took it home, I couldn't quite put my finger on it, but for some reason, I didn't like it as much.

 

I passed by another PC world branch on Saturday, and decided to pop in.

 

The retina model, is considerably thinner than my version, and also, my version is a 2012, the retina is 2014, now I feel that I purchased the machine. based on the display model. I asked in that store if I could exchange it, and pay the extra, but was told NO as I'd used it.

 

Do you think I have grounds for exchange, as I feel, the display model was not indicitive of what I was actually buying?

 

Many thanks in advance.

 

PLK

Link to post
Share on other sites

So was there a display model of the one you purchased? Or did you look at the display model for a different model and base your purchase on that without asking to see the one you were actually buying?

If you didn't actually check a display model for the one you wanted to purchase then I don't think you have much legal right to return it.

 

From the sounds of things, the display model wasn't the same as the model you were actually buying, so I'm not sure how you expect it to be indicative of something different.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically,I looked at the display model, which was advertised at £899, there was no other model, but on the price sheet, it showed the upgraded model.

 

As far as I was concerned, I was buying the one on display

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I'm a bit confused here.

First of all, what was the model you physically looked at in the store? The Retina display model? Or the non-retina/older model?

The spec sheet attached to that. Was it the spec sheet for the retina model? Or the non-retina model?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a retina model on display, at £899, there clearly was a difference between the retina model and non retina model.

 

It wasn't made clear to the OP that there was indeed a difference or the OP made an assumption, the OP purchased the non retina model.

 

The retailer should of made it clear what the OP was buying, Sales, display, POS etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes basically, I was told the only difference was the retina display, which I could live with. I was not informed that the cheaper one (which was not displayed, just had spec sheet) was indeed an older, and thicker machine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send the following amended template, send it Recorded Delivery.

 

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/action/letter-to-get-a-refund-if-your-item-is-faulty-

 

Contact your Card Provider, ask to carry out a Chargeback, amend and send the following template Recorded Delivery.

 

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/action/letter-to-make-a-chargeback-claim-

 

You will need to stop using it and restore it to it's factory restate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, yes that's a bit different if they told you the only difference was the quality of the display. If the appearance/specification is different beyond that though then they should accept the return as mis-described/mis-sold.

From your original post it wasn't clear if you spoke to anyone, it read to me like you just assumed that would be the case and went ahead with the purchase without checking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...