Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hurrah! We got there.  After asking four times about the defence you've answered. To win this you will have to be a hell of a lot more pro-active and get reading up.  The standard defence is on every single claim form thread here. So first task for the evening. Go to  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/393251-received-a-court-claim-from-a-private-parking-speculative-invoice-how-to-deal-with-it-hereupdated-dec-2021/ Scroll down to  Q2) How should I defend? There is the standard defence. Change (6) into (7) and add a new (6). 6.  In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. Get if filed this evening.
    • OK, relenting on my above irritated post ... It's worth defending it.  At the very least they are likely to offer a deal. Plus  PE have added two completely invented amounts.  The £100 charge has morphed into £125.  Then they've added £50 legal representative's costs although they have no legal representative.  Even if it went all the way to court and you lost, the  judge would likely disallow the made up £25 + £50. Please fill in the sticky as dx asked. Then dx will be on with details of how to defend.
    • Quite interesting that the Conservative East Midlands  Mayor candidate doesnt mention conservative on his promotion LOL   but he does claim that he, a Conservative politician, is the man to fix the 14 years of Conservative devastation of the region - inc 'fixing' problems inc the utter devastation of the roads, bus and train services that his party have  imposed   Must all rotate around the meaning of fixing he actually means .. fixing noun dishonest activity to make certain that a competition, race, or election is won by a particular person:   .. or perhaps he just means 'fixing' - preventing change
    • Yes, absolutely normal for them to waste everybody's time and money by asking for more time – which they are entitled to do, of course – but it is simply a waste of time. They use prepared template defences. They know they are in the wrong but they simply want to make your life tough because they don't care about you. However do keep an eye out. You never know there is just a 1% chance that they could miss the deadline in which case you should apply for judgement immediately.
    • Will check back in when the SAR from MCB is back and get advice on how to raise the formal complaint and what to say x
  • 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 
      • 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

Mot


ozzywizard
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6381 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

Hey just curious on a general question, I know a lot has changed recently with the new MOT'S etc.

 

In the past I always believed that if you take your MOT a month early you get 13 months etc. Has this been abolished.

 

My MOT was due to expire on 29th November and I took it today which is 26 days early. Now it passed straight away :) but new one is only valid untill 3rd November. I only noticed when I got home. I really dont wanna complain or cause any trouble as he passed it, more curious than anything.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think anyone on here has the answer I dont...but sign up to one of the many motoring forums and ask there..A lot of qualified macanics and mot testers on so they should be able to help8-)

This is MY oppinion for what it worth

BARCLAYS BANK LBA 23/10/05 £2,626.67:)MCOL ISSUED 11/11/05

LOMBARD DIRECT LBA + Default removal 25/10/06 £290.50 :grin: Received settlement but they won,t remove default

BARCLAYCARD LFB 10/9/06 £320.00 :cool:

AKTIV KAPITAL LBA DEFAULT REMOVAL letter sent 22/9/06 + 23/10/06 and as yet have had no reply (sent letter to all 3 CRA re-there none compliance):confused:

 

"divant worry aboot what ya owe let them woory that want,s it off ya"

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes ur are allowed 4 weeks

the mot center has made a mistake

go back and ask them for another

i am a ex mot inspector here in ni

s.a.r handed to manager-2-8-06

aknowledgement letter recieved 4-8-06

letter from dpm 10-8-06

Data Protection Act - Non-Compliance 10 days left 29-8-06

statements recieved 31/8/06

prelim letter 1/9/06

letter recieved from cru 9/9/06

lba-sent 15-9-06

small claims started 17-9-06

agreed to settle

with condition removed that i cant make another claim

waiting for funds

part 2

small claims for £893 filed 14/10/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is correct that the car can be tested up to a month early and an mot issued for up to 13 months (it is 1 calender month) but you must present your old certificate at the time the car is presented for test. If this has been done it is the testers mistake which is down to him to rectify if not the tester is not compelled to issue an amended certificate but most will if you ask in a civilized manner

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In the past I always believed that if you take your MOT a month early you get 13 months etc. Has this been abolished.

 

My MOT was due to expire on 29th November and I took it today which is 26 days early. Now it passed straight away :) but new one is only valid untill 3rd November. I only noticed when I got home. I really dont wanna complain or cause any trouble as he passed it, more curious than anything.

 

 

You can book an MOT up to 28 days in advance of its due date. In fact it is not widely known that the expiry date on your new MOT is 12 months from the expiry of your old one. This means you could have an MOT that last 13 months.

 

you also need to take you old MOT with you at the same time

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can book an MOT up to 28 days in advance of its due date. In fact it is not widely known that the expiry date on your new MOT is 12 months from the expiry of your old one. This means you could have an MOT that last 13 months.

 

you also need to take you old MOT with you at the same time

 

It's 1 calender month not 28 days as i previously stated

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is great, thanks heaps for all your advise. I did take my old MOT with me when I went for MOT he took it with him to make new MOT. When they were both passed to me together from him the old one read November 29th 2006 and new one November 3rd 2007. MOT date was Friday 3rd.

 

So this is a mistake ? Doesnt really matter though its only like 26 days so not sure if worth going back. Guess if I am passing I will drop in.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty certain the new computerised system picks up any remaining days and adds them on automatically, so could possibly be a error by VOSA.

 

I could be wrong but I tend to think for the new computerised format to do this both MOT's (expiring one and new one) should be in this format. I doubt that an MOT expiring in November 2006 would be (my old one expired in October 2006 and was the 'old', handwritten type).

Jimbo 44 - always happy to help, but always willing to learn from being corrected too!!! Whilst any advice given may be based upon personal experience, please always be sure you seek guidance from a professional in the particular field.

 

Never be afraid to try something new. Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark, but a large group of professionals built the Titanic.

 

A 'click' on the scales is always appreciated if I have helped. Many Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I could be wrong but I tend to think for the new computerised format to do this both MOT's (expiring one and new one) should be in this format. I doubt that an MOT expiring in November 2006 would be (my old one expired in October 2006 and was the 'old', handwritten type).

 

 

Depends on the garage in question, some garages went "live" before others as the they these test stations, so when they did an MOT before the computerisation came into effect they also did a dummy computerised version as they had the equipment installed by VOSA.

So when the computerisation came into effect, not all garages had the computerised system.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jimbo you are right about the system picking up on any remaining time and adding it on but for an old handwritten type certificate the time has to be added manually and the old cert number typed in. I have still had some through recently hand written so there are still some out there though not many. Likewise if you take a vehicle in for its first test early unless the DVLA have messed up the log book(surprisingly common) it will date it from that date as well without you needing to produce the V5 document (despite it saying otherwise on the system!!)

To be picky about duration using the new system it is possible to have an MOT for 13 months less 1 day as I have tried in the past to run one from for example 18th March 2006 to 18th April 2007 and it rejected it so do bear that in mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah it was an hand written MOT previous. The new MOT is the first one I have had computerized. To be honest I will probably just leave it as I dont have time to go back to garage for 3 weeks extra. Worry about it next year lol.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...