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

Corporate and Legal Collections


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3299 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 Cassie,

 

 

I've just seen your post and felt compelled to create an account up here and reply due to a similar experience I had a few years back.

 

 

I too was involved in an incident in which I had a prang with a parked vehicle, however I actually managed to find the owner of the car (through an incredibly embarrassing series of doorstep conversations concerning who may be the owner of the slightly smashed Range Rover, not my finest moment) and had a conversation about my reimbursing him directly without involving insurance companies as I was, unfortunately, without cover at the time.

 

 

A long story short he decided to go through his insurance company who eventually contacted me for repayment of the monies that they had to spend fixing their insured car.

 

 

At first I ignored this contact as I felt that it was unwarranted as I had no responsibility or obligation towards the insurance company given I had crashed into an individual and I was not insured.

 

 

When it came down to it (after a hefty solicitors fee for taking advice) the insurance company are well within their rights to recover from the uninsured driver as they are forced to pay out for the repairs/ loss under their contracts etc. They are then entitled to recover this from me and you via what I've been led to believe are 'the rights of subrogation' (please correct me if I'm wrong) but that's getting a bit too far down the jargon path for me.

 

 

What I'm getting at is I believe you will be liable to repay the insurance company as there is a legal duty to cover their costs if the pay out in an uninsured incident.

 

 

As regards the debt collectors though, I am less well placed to advise you however I would say getting any paperwork sounds like a good starting point to me.

 

 

I hope this helped,

 

 

Graeme

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...