Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • If/when it's sold you'll be able to challenge their costs, or defend if they come after you for a shortfall. I think it's probably a very long shot, but you could look at the exact wording of the PoA in the loan agreement and security. But normally they give pretty wide ranging powers.
    • i ordered from carreg and i got my paperwork today v750 and the nominee detail shows last name as arnold my name isnt arnold    it even shows on my invoice that is not arnold    i emailed them about it but properly wont get a reply today but im guessing if i was to assign this private reg to my car i cant because my last name isnt arnold and i dont want to risk assigning it to my car and end up with new v5 saying arnold as then that will make my insurance void 
    • That's the point. I am arguing that the works costs should never have been incurred. That they should not be added to my account at all - which means not taking the costs out of eventual sale proceeds.  Vat should have been added to the contractor's invoices and the lender should have paid - out of their pocket.  The property was in great condition; immaculate.  It's a silly situation. 
    • Thanks dx.  His situation has unfortunately got complicated and I can't (unofficially) help anymore.  He can't pay for anything.  He has funds. But his account was temp blocked for some silly reason.  He is too unwell to call them.  And, of course, they won't talk to me or unblock it.  There's all sorts of bills to pay and none are being paid. I was worried the council may try get a charging order.  At the moment they seem to have just got lots of liability orders.  The bailiff letters are threatening.
    • From an ex-Tory minister. Former Tory minister vows to vote Labour over Tories’ climate failures | General election 2024 | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Exclusive: Chris Skidmore, ex-energy minister, says Rishi Sunak’s bid to turn net zero into culture war issue is ‘greatest tragedy of his premiership’  
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

ASA Not as bright as they should be doh


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3285 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

ASA Adjudication on accidentinjuryclaim.so

accidentinjuryclaim.so

 

Date: 24 June 2015

Media: Text Message

Sector: Financial

Number of complaints: 2

Complaint Ref: A15-296651

Ad

A text message from a personal injury claims company, http://www.accidentinjuryclaim.so, stated "Its [sic] been signed off, we have 2886.41 in your name for the accident you had, for us to put in your bank [sic] Now just fill out www.accidentinjuryclaim.so".

 

Issue

The complainant challenged whether the ad was misleading, because they had not been involved in any accident or made such a claim.

 

CAP Code (Edition 12)

3.13.7

Response

accidentinjuryclaim.so did not respond to the ASA's enquiries.

 

Assessment

Upheld

 

The ASA was concerned by the lack of response from accidentinjuryclaim.so and their apparent disregard for the Code, which was a breach of CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 1.7 (Unreasonably delay). We reminded them of their responsibility to respond promptly to our enquiries and we told them to do so in future. Since we had not seen any evidence showing that the complainant had been involved in an accident, had made a claim or was entitled to the money referred to in the text message, we concluded that the claim had not been substantiated and was misleading.

 

The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 (Misleading Advertising) and 3.7 (Substantiation).

 

Action

The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told accidentinjuryclaim.so that their future advertising must not state that they held money for people to claim when that was not the case.

Edited by Conniff
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's .so, Somalia. Did they honestly expect them to respond. The text was probably sent on a stolen mobile as well.

 

The domain is registered in Hong Kong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...