Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I googled "prescribed disability" to see where it is defined for the purposes of S.92. I found HMRC's definition, which included deafness. I don't  think anyone is saying deaf people cant drive, though! digging deeper,  Is it that “prescribed disability” (for the purposes of S.88 and S.92) is defined at: The Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999 WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK These Regulations consolidate with amendments the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1996...   ….. and sleep apnoea / increased daytime sleepiness is NOT included there directly as a condition but only becomes prescribed under “liability to sudden attacks of disabling giddiness or fainting” (but falling asleep isn't fainting!), so it isn’t defined there as a “prescribed disability”  Yet, under S.92(2)(b) RTA 1988 “ any other disability likely to cause the driving of a vehicle by him in pursuance of a licence to be a source of danger to the public" So (IMHO) sleep apnea / daytime sleepiness MIGHT be a prescribed disability, but only if it causes likelihood of "driving being a source of danger to the public" : which is where meeting / not meeting the medical standard of fitness to drive comes into play?  
    • You can counter a Judges's question on why you didn't respond by pointing out that any company that charges you with stopping at a zebra crossing is likely to be of a criminal mentality and so unlikely to cancel the PCN plus you didn't want to give away any knowledge you had at that time that could allow them to counteract your claim if it went to Court. There are many ways in which you can see off their stupid claim-you will see them in other threads  where our members have been caught by Met at other airports as well as Bristol.  Time and again they take motorists to Court for "NO Stopping" apparently completely forgetting that the have lost doing that because no stopping is prohibitory and cannot form a contract. Yet they keep on issuing PCNs because so many people just pay up . Crazy . You can see what chuckleheads they are when you read their Claim form which is pursuing you as the driver or the keeper. they don't seem to understand that on airport land because of the Bye laws, the keeper is never liable.   
    • The video-sharing app told the BBC that a "very limited" number of accounts had been compromised.View the full article
    • The King is the second monarch to appear on Bank of England notes which will be fed gradually into the system.View the full article
    • The King is the second monarch to appear on Bank of England notes which will be fed gradually into the system.View the full article
  • 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
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3534 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 have been with bh for over 16 years only missed 1 payment in all this time ,,i was wondering who is liable for accidental breakage of phone screen as i have been paying bh the osc which does say its covered for any damages ty

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Morning claz39

 

Full ownership of a product isn’t transferred to customers until the last payment is made on their agreement(s). Therefore, we must ensure that our goods are covered for Fire, Theft and Accidental Damage. Customers can take this cover through a home contents policy. We offered Damage Liability Cover (DLC) to customers who did not wish to take out a home insurance policy or alternative cover.

 

Damage Liability Cover (DLC) means that you will not have to continue paying for your product if it is damaged or stolen (subject to Terms and Conditions).

 

If you took out your agreement after 2nd September 2013 we now include a similar range of benefits as a standard part of our service and it is included in your weekly price.

 

Please contact your local store to discuss your options and to complete a claim for your mobile phone.

 

Should you have any further concerns or enquiries, please contact our Customer Relations Team on 0800 526 069 or email [email protected] with the full details and we will be happy to help.

 

Many Thanks

 

Jason

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 years !!

 

Put the broken phone down to experience and reclaim all those fee's instead of making a claim.

 

I fear if you make the claim you may not be able to reclaim the DLC.

 

Reclaim all the fee's and buy yourself a new phone. If you can rclaim 16 years worth then dropping your phone might be the best thing that could have happened to you :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Therefore, we must ensure that our goods are covered for Fire, Theft and Accidental Damage. Customers can take this cover through a home contents policy. We offered Damage Liability Cover (DLC) to customers who did not wish to take out a home insurance policy or alternative cover.

 

I think a re-phrase is required here.

 

"We forced DLC on Customers who did not prove they had contents or other suitable insurance" ... and hence is unfairly inflating the cost shown.

 

On a side note, I'm extremely proud to announce I paid my final payment last weekend. Other than them owing me £2500+ I will have nothing more to do with this company.

 

Furthermore, Jason can you point me in the direction of another company (excluding the other companies named on here) who force insurance for buying products? I think you may struggle!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a re-phrase is required here.

 

"We forced DLC on Customers who did not prove they had contents or other suitable insurance" ... and hence is unfairly inflating the cost shown.

 

On a side note, I'm extremely proud to announce I paid my final payment last weekend. Other than them owing me £2500+ I will have nothing more to do with this company.

 

Furthermore, Jason can you point me in the direction of another company (excluding the other companies named on here) who force insurance for buying products? I think you may struggle!

Sounds about right, as a local Councillor have just been informing tenants and residents of the dangers and hidden costs of the Bright House that has opened in the local town, and pointed them in the direction of the Tenant Contents Insurance schemes run by many social Housing providers, where cover such as that demanded by Bright House can be obtained at a much lower cost. There may well be similar schemes run by councils for Private Tenants and poorer Owner Occupiers so it is worth checking.

 

Personally i would reclaim, but would advise that Bright House would likely refuse to let OP buy anything else from them as they wouldn't be such an attractive cash cow in the future.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...