Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you @BankFodder, your statement is a correct understanding of my position and I agree, it is actually really what I was looking for in starting this thread, as I too believed that the maximum I could claim for is that which I sold it for, even though this was substantially below market value at the time. And so, this sold value is what I shall be claiming for + the other expenses. @dx100uk I get your point, but this is just not what I want to expose myself to. Unfortunately I was one of the unlucky ones to have my details stolen in the Peoples Energy hack, and in 2020 I discovered that those details had been used to take out car insurance, and that the insured was then involved in a collision and my details were dragged through the mud. Despite Aviva cancelling the claim and treating as though it never were, even though I have the letters from them to say that they have removed this claim from the insurance database, I still get refused insurance and credit products to this day until I send across the letter from Aviva which explains that I was a victim of fraud. So you'll forgive me for not jumping up and uploading my data to a server utility for which I have no control over its retention policy, or where the server is located globally, its legal jurisdiction, or its security protocols.
    • Speeding (Revised 2017) – Sentencing (sentencingcouncil.org.uk)  
    • upload sites dont retain copies and so what if they do... what do you think they are going to do, kidnap your grannies budgie or something..how the hell would any of the info required by us be of any use to them..... stop being paranoid and put them all in one mass multipage pdf.  
    • https://audicam.audi.co.uk/customer/6660055/00cc584e9769699ddba3807a2995032f/59022-13062024 Please let me know if you can access footage 
  • 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

Able group - terrible, terrible service! Avoid at all costs


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2956 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

The ABLE GROUP provide property maintenance services, ie glaziers, locksmiths, plumbers, electricians, drainage, gas, heating, pest control, etc.

 

Please note however: If you need any such services, I suggest you look elsewhere. I have had the most horrendous experience with them and I hope my post helps others avoid going through the same horror story.

 

Booked them to clear my house external drains, was quoted £114 to have them 4 drains unblocked.

 

On the 7th of April, their Eng. came out, informed that the drains were now in good working order. My other half took his word for it and why not... They are supposed to be the specialists.

 

After weeks of rain, I took time during last sunny weekend to clear the garden in prep. for the Summer and noticed that two drains had not been touched at all and were still blocked.

 

Called their Customer Service, a few days ago, no reply.

 

Called today and they refuse point blank to rectify the issue unless I pay again £114.00.

 

What an outrage this company is really. I am absolutely furious with this disgusting bunch of dodgy people, taking the mickey.

 

My advice to anyone is very simple: Learn from my experience and definitely engage an alternative company.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Last November my 98-year-old mother called a plumber to clear a blocked toilet. He came from the Able Group, with a head office located in Leigh-on-Sea, Essex, and the only reason my mother chose them was because they had a big advert in the local trade directory. The blockage wasn't cleared and the plumber charged £123 for the experience. All he did was pour water down the pan and there was no sign of any rods or jetting equipment being used. I have tried complaining but all that has been offered is a measly 10% refund as a gesture of goodwill

 

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2010/feb/13/plumber-cost-toilet-blocked-complaint

Link to post
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just emailed them in no uncertain terms:

 

From: xxx

Sent: 12 May 2016 18:27

To: xxx

Subject: FORMAL COMPLAINT - JOB 1851357

 

Hi,

 

Further to my earlier communications over the phone with your company today, additionally to another phone call a few days ago, to which I received no reply, I write to protest about the appalling manner in which I have been treated, which was in breach of my rights under provision of the Consumer Goods & Services Act 1974; and now is in breach of my rights under provision of the CONSUMER RIGHTS ACT 2015.

 

In view of the fact that I contracted your services to come to the property and clear the drains, but your engineer did not clear the drains satisfactorily, leaving TWO of the four drain holes unchecked and untouched [and therefore blocked as they were before], your company is in breach of the said Act, including but not limited to Chapter IV – Section 49.

 

I am therefore writing to demand satisfaction of my Right of Repeat Performance Free of Charge, under provision of the said Act, including but not limited to Chapter IV Section 55 and any other subsequent provisions of the same Act.

 

I should remind you that under The Consumer Rights Act 2015, Chapter 4 – Section 57, your liabilities cannot be excluded or restricted by any terms of your contract for provision of services and therefore my Rights do stand valid!

 

Please note that if satisfaction as demanded herein is not forthcoming within SEVEN DAYS of this email, I will take legal action under provision of the said Act – Chapter 4 in all of its relevant provisions, including but not limited to Sections 54, 55, 56 and 58.

 

Please ring the property to arrange a repeat of the service, to the extent which was required and contracted at the beginning, to clear ALL external drains and ensure rain and drain water flows freely through, WITHIN 7 DAYS OF THE DATE ON THIS EMAIL.

 

Failure to do so will prompt me to take legal action without any further notice.

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see that the letter has basically everything that you need in it, but I have to say that is rather long winded and I generally find that this kind of letter it is not very effective because it sounds verbose and companies don't often take this kind of style very seriously.

 

I hope you won't be too offended if I say that it sounds like a rant.

 

Anyway, you sent it and you made your point very clear. Have you informed yourself as to how you begin your legal action in seven days when they don't respond?

 

Also, do you realise that there is a pre-action protocol which in most circumstances requires you give 14 days notice before beginning a legal action?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not need them to quak in their boots. I simply need them to comply with the Law and do the job properly.

 

If they do not contact back and do not arrange to repeat the job, this time properly, I will seek enforcement of the Law through the Courts.

 

It is that simple. Whether they quak in their boots or not, I really do not give a toss about that.

 

Companies in the UK take customers for granted all the time. Enough is enough!

 

Hi,

 

The letter is a bit longer because I wanted to quote the relevant legislation. I hope they realise that they are liable.

 

I thought 7 days was enough... It doesn't matter, by the time the Court paper work goes into processing, it will be more than 14 days.

 

My understanding is that the claim will have to be filed through Small Claims Track, and if the company does not comply with the Specific Performance Order, I would have to return to the Court and enter a request for the Court to enforce the Order.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...