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
      • 162 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 3376 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




I had a letter notifying me of liability order hearing on 9th April.



Balanced owed was £302.14



I phoned up and paid £100 off the debt owed and set up DD for new Ctax year.



I was assured by adviser that I did not have to attend the hearing as it was just a formality to acknowledge I was liable for the debt.

He told me to wait for the letter and then phone up to make an arrangement to pay remaining £202.14 and that would be that.

I didn't attend the hearing and waited for letter.


Letter came on 15th April (dated 14th April) showing debt of 302.14.



Letter said I had 14 days to pay in full or make arrangement.



Yesterday I phoned up to make arrangement to pay.

I was told the balance was still 302.14 as the £100 I paid was taken off new tax year...

I can't make arrangement to pay as been passed to bailiffs.


The letter I received stated I had 14 days to pay in full or to arrange payment but they have not given me that chance to pay.



I phoned them today after not sleeping and made an official complaint.

Manager called me back.



As it stands at the moment,

I have set up a repayment plan and the adviser is being disaplined for giving false information.

But the complaints team can take up to 21 days to investigate and recall the debt from recovery

but if the bailiffs contact me I have to pay the bailiff costs in the meantime

and if complaints department find in my favour,

someone (council/bailiffs?) Will reimburse me but they couldn't tell me who.


The council lied to me.

They didn't apply the money I paid to the outstanding debt.


They passed straight to bailiffs instead of giving me 14 days to pay as specified in their letter and denying me the ability to pay.



They have been wholly unreasonable and unfair causing me additional impending bailiff charges.


PLEASE! What can I do??


Edited to add...my complaint has caused a storm apparently said the council manager?

Link to post
Share on other sites

they should be putting a hold on the bailiff action

its their call so they can stop it all end of.




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

Be prepared to send a Formal Complaint to CEO, elected leader and your local council member, citing the maladministration of your account by the Revenues dept that might lead to unneccessary bailiff action

We could do with some help from you.


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

Thanks brassknecked,

I made a formal complaint today and I am happy to complain to anyone that I need to.



The manager had already listened to the recorded call with the adviser prior to the liability order and so there is evidence that I paid £100 off the debt but he maladministered it. It also confirms that he gave me false information and detrimental advise. The manager apologised and said they are doing all they can to recall the debt from the bailiffs but they cant say if they will contact me and whether i'll be charged in the meantime.



I did ask if it was common practice for their department to tell us one thing and do another? He said absolutely not but when I then asked why my account had been transferred to bailiffs before i'd even received the notice of liability he couldn't explain.

They told me yesterday that they couldn't take a payment off the liability debt because it had been passed to bailiffs, but the letter I got yesterday said




alternatively you can contact us on XXXXXXXX where an arrangement for re-payment will be considered"



I really don't understand how they can do that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Council are still 100% liable for the actions & charges of their contractor - in this case the Bailiffs - and they can recall the debt. Just remind the "manager" you have spoken to of the Council's vicarious liability.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running




Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you ploddertom. I have arranged to pay the outstanding £202.14 on 1st May (next pay day) I am worried about the unnecessary additional bailiff charges...Im not made of money, if I were I wouldn't have been in this position in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was the maladministration that caused it to go to the bailiffs, then when its recalled, you wont owe anything to them.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..



If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and thanks renegadeimp, I don't know why it was sent to bailiffs when all I've been doing is what they advised and I just want to pay it off as soon as possible. I always thought enforcement was a last option to recover debt. Silly me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent result.

We could do with some help from you.


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

When the new bailiff regs came out exactly one year ago, councils were very cautious indeed and even though the regulations had revoked the previous right of the councils to send a '14 day' letter to debtors (warning that a Liability Order had been obtained and would be passed to bailiffs after 14 days) most councils were nonetheless sending the '14 day' letters. With cut backs to council services I am hearing that more and more local authorities are considering WITHDRAWING this procedure for this current (2015/16) tax year and instead, once the Liability Order has been obtained to send the debt straight to the bailiff provider.


Worrying times ahead.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...