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

Excel/BW claimform - PCN Peel Centre Stockport 14/08/2015


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2787 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

  • 2 months later...

for starters,

when you defend the claim it is moved to your local court so they have to travel.

 

They obviously fancy their chances because you admitted a liability

by offering them a fiver for their troubles so we will need to know exactly what you said in the letter that made that offer to see if it was without admitting any contractual acceptance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

a breakdown of the amount claimed would be helpful as the original sum was less than £100 so there is the chance to claim Champerty and Maintenance if BW are claiming expenses. ( look this up, might not apply but always worth considering to drop the claim back to £100)

Link to post
Share on other sites

well, that is not an admission that you actually owed them anything, merely wished to end any action.

 

They are entitled to claim their pound of flesh but will now have a harder job justifying it as a contractual charge.

 

The signage there was changed a while ago as a court found it inadequate and the new signs still cause problems of not being visible to people who park in certain spaces.

 

Now, how did they respond to your offer to meet their actual losses?

 

Also, they will have a massive problem justifying their legal bill as they have just added £50 to the earlier attempt to extort £54 from you as a debt collection fee.

 

 

I would suggest that the £54 solicitors fee is maintenance and not allowed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

if you sent off your AOS and skeleton defence in time then it is a waiting game.

 

 

The courts service will then contact you with an allocation questionnaire

asking about dates you arent available and whether you want the hearing at another court rather than local one

( for disability access reasons mainly).

 

 

Keep an eye on the calendar for when Excel have to put in the next payment for allocation

as they may well just go all quiet when they realise you are one of the people who arent rolling over and paying up without a fight

 

 

. If it goes past the time then you can apply to court for the claim to be struck out

and they will have a hell of a job starting all over again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

skeleton defence should be simply

that there was no breach of contract because the signage that offered a contract did not have any conditions that could lead to a breach as claimed.

 

Leave it at that for the moment, the signage around the car park varies and dont form core conditions so the main sign may well be an invitation to treat. We will go into the detail later.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

check dates. If they are late paying the allocation fee ask court to strike out the claim. This means they will have to start again and they wont get an easy ride.

 

As DX says, they may not be willing to proceed but hope you are intimidated enough to pay up now and save them a fortune in fees and costs on a claim they are bound to lose.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras.
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...