Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • OK  so you may not have outed yourself if you said "we". No matter either way you paid. Snotty letter I am surprised that they were so quick off the mark threatening Court. They usually take months to go that far. No doubt that as you paid the first one they decided to strike quickly and scare you into paying. Dear Chuckleheads  aka Alliance,  I am replying to your LOCs You may have caught me the first time but that is  the end. What a nasty organisation you are. You do realise that you now have now no reason to continue to pursue me after reading my appeal since you know that my car was not cloned. Any further pursuit will end up with a complaint to the ICO that you are breaching my GDPR.  Please confirm that you have removed my details from your records. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I haven't gone for a snotty letter this time as they know that you paid for your car in another car park. So using a shot across their bows .  If it doesn't deter them and they send in the debt collectors or the Court you will then be able to get more money back from them for  breachi.ng your data protection than they will get should they win in Court-and they have no chance of that as you have paid. So go in with guns blazing and they might see sense.  Although never underestimate how stupid they are. Or greedy.
    • Thank you. Such a good point. They did issue all 3 before I paid though. I only paid one because I didn’t have proof of parking that time, only for two others.    Unfortunately no proof of my appeal as it was just submitted through a form on their website and no copy was sent to me. I only have the reply. I believe I just put something like “we made the honest mistake of using the incorrect parking area on the app” and that’s it. Thanks again for your help. 
    • They are absolute chuckleheads. You paid but because you entered a different car park site also belonging to them they are pursuing you despite them knowing what you had done. It would be very obvious to everyone, including Alliance that your car could not have been in two places at the same time. Thank you for posting the PCN so quickly making it a pity that you appealed since there are so many things wrong with it that you as keeper are not liable to pay the charge. They rarely accept appeals since that would mean they lose money but they have virtually no chance of beating you in Court. Very unlikely that they will take you to Court given the circumstances. Just in case you didn't out yourself as the driver could you please post up your appeal.
    • Jasowter I hope that common sense prevails with Iceland and the whole matter can be successfully ended. I would perhaps not have used a spell checker just to prove the dyslexia 🙂 though it may have made it more difficult to read. I noticed that you haven't uploaded the original PCN .Might not be necessary if the nes from Iceland is good. Otherwise perhaps you could get your son to do it by following the upload instructions so that we can appeal again with the extra ammunition provided by the PCN. Most of them rarely manage to get the wording right which means that you as the keeper are not liable to pay the charge-only the driver is and they do not know the name and address of the driver. So that would put you both in the clear if the PCN is non compliant.
    • Thank you so much. Yes, I wish I had done my research and not paid. It's all for the same car park. Here is one of the original PCNs, they are all the same bar different dates. PCN-22.03.24-1.pdf PCN-22.03.24-2.pdf
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Halliwell Jones Mini dealership refusing to refund deposit***Resolved***


Beckybee
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3004 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

Hello,

 

Sorry for the long wordy post.

 

I recently paid a £500 deposit and signed a new vehicle hire contract for a Mini with Chilli Pack from Halliwell Jones. 3 days later they contacted me via phone to say that Mini had increased the price of the Chilli Pack and it's now roughly £1000 more expensive (this wasn't advertised on the Mini website). The sales rep said that there was nothing that they could do apart from try to find another car that's already been built with the old chilli pack. They managed to find one that had everything I wanted but was more expensive because it had heated seats. After some hesitation I agreed to this car but called back about 20 mins later to say that i was unsure about what to do. I tried to negotiate a better deal but they wouldn't budge and made out that I had already had as much discount as I was going to get etc. and i said that i needed to think about it. By this time they had already bought this car from another dealership. I told them over the phone that i was going to try and get a better deal from another dealer because i wasn't happy with it at all and that evening that's what I did.

 

When I then asked Halliwell Jones for my deposit back they have refused on the grounds that i agreed to order the second car however, according to their terms and conditions the original agreement was cancelled when they could not fulfil it and the second agreement is classed as a distance selling one and because of this I have the right to cancel within 14 days and don't have to give a reason.

 

Am I in the right here? :|

 

Any help you can give will be very much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I think your logic is impeccable.

 

I think you should put it in writing to them in exactly that way and see what they say.

 

Also, if you have any further dealings with them on the telephone, implement the advice in our customer services guide first.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/consumer-contracts-regulations

 

In fact you will see that there are a number of formalities which must be satisfied for a distance contract – and you will probably find that these did not happen

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your response. :)

 

I have written to them on numerous occasions and their sales director has basically told me to go away and that he isn't honouring the refund because 'I have just changed my mind' (in his words).

 

I just wanted to ensure that I was definitely in the right before sending a 'Letter Before Action'.

 

Thanks for the consumer rights link, they definitely didn't inform me of my right to cancel or of anything else apart from the details of the car.

 

I think what they are trying to do is to insinuate that the second car is covered by the original agreement.

 

I am so glad i stumbled upon this forum. Thanks for your help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only send a letter before action if you are going to go ahead and carry out your threat.

 

I'm quite sure that you will have to.

 

Write a clear letter detailing in a succinct and bullet pointed form exactly what has happened, why you want the refund and what law you are basing your claim on.

 

Tell them that if they don't respond to with the refund in full within 14 days that you will sue them in the County Court and without further notice.

 

At the expiry of 14 days – sue them.

 

If you're not prepared to do this step then don't bother to write to them. Don't bluff, you will only lose credibility.

 

I rate your chances of success are better than 95%. Frankly they would be stupid if they didn't put their hands up once they receive the court papers – but they will then be required to pay the court fee as well + the 8% interest that you should add to the total that you are claiming.

 

Use the 14 days to prepare your case, open up an account on MoneyClaim and draft your claim there. You don't need any particular form of words.

 

 

  1. The claimant agreed to buy a car from the defendant on XXX date
  2. the claimant placed a deposit on the car of £500
  3. the agreement was entered into over the telephone and therefore is subject to the distance selling regulations in place at that time under the Consumer Contracts Regulations 2014
  4. The claimant withdrew from the contract XX days later
  5. the defendant has refused to accept the cancellation of the contract and refuses to return the deposit
  6. the claimant seeks the refund of £XXX + interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts act 1984

I expect that that is all you need for the moment. Hopefully it will fit in to the word count limit on MoneyClaim.

 

If they don't put their hands up and they file a defence then we can have a closer look and help you to draft a reply to the defence if we think that it is necessary.

 

How far away from you does the dealer live? Because the case would have to be heard in your local court and they will have to make a trip there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you once again for your help with this.

 

Just to be clear, the initial agreement was made on their premises. It was only after they had breached the terms of the original agreement that the second agreement was made over the phone.

 

So the list for MoneyClaim would look more like this:

 

The claimant agreed to buy a car from the defendant on XXX date

The claimant placed a deposit on the car of £500

The defendant broke the terms of the contract and was no longer able to provide the agreed vehicle at the agreed price

The claimant agreed, over the telephone, to take a different car for a different price and with different equipment

the agreement was entered into over the telephone and therefore is subject to the distance selling regulations in place at that time under the Consumer Contracts Regulations 2014

The claimant withdrew from the contract XX days later

the defendant has refused to accept the cancellation of the contract and refuses to return the deposit

the claimant seeks the refund of £XXX + interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts act 1984

 

I have drafted the letter before action. Should i be asking them to provide any documents or the recordings of the phone calls that they have?

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the basis that the initial agreement was cancelled, and there was a new contract made over the telephone for a car which you had not previously seen, then I think that the rules applying to distance selling must apply.

 

At the end of the day, if they decide to defend then they will try to say something like it was all one agreement but which was varied after discussion on the telephone.

 

However, if you didn't see the replacement car then I don't think that there is very much mileage in their argument.

 

Of course it will be for the judge to decide. It sounds pretty amazing behaviour for the Halliwell Jones dealership who generally speaking seem to have a pretty decent reputation. Maybe the manager was having a bad day

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be tempted to have the LBA typed out and ready to go, shove it into the director's hand if they don't play ball. (and then send an additional copy by recorded post...)

My views are my own and are not representative of any organisation. if you've found my post helpful please click on the star below.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, i've since had another Email from Mini group who are unwilling to get involved, despite the fact that I am still buying a Mini (you'd think they would want to look after their paying customers).

 

And I have a meeting booked in with the Sales Director of Halliwell Jones this Thursday so we shall see what they have to say then. I've got the LBA ready and will present it to him when we meet if he still refuses to listen to me.

 

I will update the tread after the meeting :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent well done Becky

 

I will amend your thread title to reflect the outcome.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...