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

A1 Comms telecoms debt - now court threats.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3171 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

A few years Ago a phone contract was purchased through one of A1 Comms online companies, The contract we where told was after a credit check and an agreement to sign a 2 year contract with O2.

 

Now after 14 months my son wanted to change network so we called the service provider and they said to end our contract we had to pay an outstanding amount which we did.

 

Over a year went past and all was good until my wife got a call from Burlington saying we owed them over £350

 

we told them to send us a copy of any paperwork and I was told by an "English Person" in some weird tongue that he could not send us paperwork as they did not have our address and would we confirm it.

 

I told my wife not to speak to them as it must be a [problem]

 

however over the next two weeks she got numerous calls and then BINGO they sent us a letter (they must have found the address).

 

We contacted O2 and they said under our credit agreement with them we had paid it off in full and there was no monies outstanding.

 

I then find out that in the small print it says A1comms can charge us if we end our contract early,

 

when I contacted them they said it was because A1comms subsidised the handset of which I said "Rollocks" as the amount I had paid to O2 was more than enough to cover the handset and airtime + commission and we got NO DISCOUNT from O2 paying it early.

 

Now I can buy the phone NEW now sim free for £100 so why are they charging me £350+ when they would have got no where near that in the first place.

 

Its not as if A1comms called us first and said "you owe us money" they just past it on to Burlington Parasites Group which I find remarkable.

 

What can I do as £350+ is NOT a reasonable charge and is NOT what they would have got from O2.

 

Cheers

Nick

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep an eye on it.

 

Looking at there web site they are just chancers.

 

16.3 Upon termination of the Contract for any reason:

16.3.1 the Customer shall immediately pay to the Supplier all outstanding invoices, and in respect of any part of the Price and Additional Charges or other sums payable by the Customer but for which no invoice has been submitted, the Supplier may submit an invoice which shall be payable immediately on receipt; and

16.3.2 each party shall return, delete or destroy all Confidential Information and all other information which has been provided to it by the other party belonging to that other party in whatever medium in accordance with the instructions of that other party; and

16.3.2 is so bad it's laughable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone what's to spoof you into paying for their next holiday. :wink:

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

  • 2 months later...

Hi All,

This is now at court threatening stage giving me 14 days before action,

 

 

if it was my account I would just say come on then but as it's in the mother in laws.

 

From day one they have not behaved correctly?,

 

 

They did not make any contact with us before appointing Burlington

and they have admitted that is how they do things.

 

Any help

 

Nick

Link to post
Share on other sites

if but maybe not will

 

 

dx

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...