Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Barry Beavis Vs Parking Eye Update?

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3372 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

All seems to have gone extremely quiet on this in the press.


Anyone know what happened/is happening with this court case?


It looked at the end of February as though a fairly short court case was commencing, and it was well reported in the media, but since then, nothing (that I can see anyway)!

Link to post
Share on other sites


As far as I can tell, the judges still haven't made a decision and they will do so 'at a later date' what ever or whenever that is.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought you armchair lawyers would have known the judges have up to three months to give a reserved judgement?


So you join this forum just to make a remark like that. Why?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies so far everyone.


I'm guessing potential impending disaster for the PPCs was the reason why I received yet another "14 days to pay or we take you to court, no more chances" letter yesterday, the first one since I received exactly the same "14 days to pay or we take you to court, no more chances" threat was received early December (which I assumed was an attempt to fund the office christmas party).

Link to post
Share on other sites

My money is on "PPC employee who knows that they may well be out of a job in a few weeks". :violin:


It pinged my PPC troll radar when they mentioned "armchair lawyers" (whatever that means). It's a favourite term used by PPCs when they want to criticise forums like this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A colleague of mine received a letter stating PE were prepared to take her to court as she had not appealed - the original parking charge letter was back in September and an appeal letter sent to them at that time (by recorded delivery and they signed for it!) . They didn't respond or send a POPLA code (now saying they did) and now 6 months later they send a demand for payment. Seems to me they are raking out all the old unpaid cases and trying to get some money in.

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums



This site is run solely on donations


My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And note the remark by PP that PE are still withholding the the important snippet of information that the case went to appeal. This is happening in court, in letters they send out to their victims, and on their website.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...