Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • and it legally informs them of your correct and current address as you must do with all old debts last paid/used in say 7 yrs you dont want backdoor CCJ's. what were the names of these IVA scammers, the one you took it out with, and the one that scammed you to let them take over please? your story is slightly worrying. dx  
    • Incidentally, congratulations on not buying the warranty. That is another Big Motoring World rip-off. See what we have to say about extended warranties and the Big Motoring World attitude to them is particularly unhelpful
    • well that google is from 2019, but the photos are certainly of someone driving on the public highway in/out by an ANP system, though the site of where the camera actually is, is not showing there are anpr cameras up by the low yellow barriers but they wont get from facing shots from there. interesting, needs to be checked if the road IS a public highway but on private land, cause as you say, if the whole area is max 4hrs , how does the hotel work< ?? must have a reg entry system.  now as for taking pictures of cars on a public highway then guessing the are parking ...erm.... i dont thnk thats right nor allowed under GDPR. dx  
    • Under the consumer rights act 2015, if a defect manifests itself within 30 days and you have a right to return the vehicle for a full refund. If any defect manifests itself within the first six months of ownership then you have a right to return the vehicle for a full refund subject to the retailers right to carry out a repair. If the retailer declines to repair or if the repair fails then you have the right to return. The problem here is that you have to assert their right. It's a bit ridiculous – but you have to do let them know preferably in writing that you are asserting your rights under the consumer rights act either the 30 day right or the six month right. I suppose that you haven't done this – which would be quite understandable because most people don't know that these rights exist and that they are subject to these conditions – the condition that the right must be inserted. It is frankly ridiculous. The dealers know it and we have lots of instances of this company delaying appointments et cetera and our strong suspicion is that they are simply trying to run their customers out of time. On the basis that you haven't asserted your rights, we now have to look to ordinary contract law. You are entitled to purchase a vehicle which is of satisfactory condition and which remains that way for a reasonable period of time. Clearly it is in satisfactory. They are blaming you. Has your independent inspection identified the reason for the defect? This will be important because as you have seen BMW are already saying it is down to your driving and you are going to have to produce evidence that it wasn't down to your driving and the you drove it absolutely reasonably and it was simply the condition of the car. Have you been without the car for any period of time. Is it driveable now? If the car was off the road for a substantial amount of time and was still off the road then you would be able to argue that this is a fundamental breach of contract and that you have been deprived of substantially the whole benefit of the contract and therefore you will be entitled to treat the contract as breached by Big Motoring World and insist on cancelling the contract. It may be that you will eventually be obliged to keep the car but have the repairs paid for. Have you had any quotations for the work that needs doing? I asked you questions about the MOT – but you haven't responded.
    • A 'violent left wing mob', comprised of a chap in a red hoody with a damp polystyrene coffee cup and a bit of wet cement, gets nowhere near cowering frightened farage some distance away on top of his double decker bus .. as farages security and support seem to film the incident grinning     Farage bravely flinches, grimaces and seems to almost burst into tears as the 'objects managed to travel a part of the way toward his position on top of his bus. His reactions honed by having a bit of milk splash him at a prior incident allow him to swiftly fall into a protective cower and grimace .. .. Sometime after, once the mob of 1 had been safely bundled away, farage apparently wipes his eyes of tears, and rising from his cowed and frightened pose, bravely shouts “I will not be bullied or cowed by a violent left-wing mob who hate our country.” .. however few they may comprise of.   https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/nigel-farage-cement-barnsley-reform-uk-b2560501.html  
  • 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 
        • Like
      • 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

EXCEL PCN 2015 Peel Centre now BW claimform


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2726 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

  • Replies 107
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

well until/unless they reply to your 31:14 we don't really know do we.

 

 

you've weeks yet before you need to file it

 

 

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

so,

tell us if they respond by the 25th and if not we will pen a skeleton defence.

 

 

This will just be bullet points for the moment,

you will have bags of time to go into all of the detail when you are told to exchange statements and documents,

normally a fortnight before the hearing.

 

 

They wont want that to happen so you may get a request for a paper hearing .

 

 

Object to it if you do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Defence not due till/by 4pm 06/09/2016

 

No harm in looking at bw excel VCS claimforn threads already here mind and finding what to put

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 weeks later...

Today I received a letter from BW Legal.

No mention of the CPR 31.14 letter I sent to them by recorded delivery.

 

Their letter is just referring to their previous letter and saying that I have until 14th September to pay the balance of £54 legal fees + £100 parking charge?

 

They also say that if I do not respond they will initiate court proceedings?

 

But they have already instituted court proceedings?

 

What are they on about?

 

Regards

 

Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

same letter anyone that sent the one line denial letter has got

 

ignore

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

Hello there.

 

Have they said they 'will' initiate legal proceedings or have they worded it another way please?

 

HB

Here is the letter I received yesterday.

Incidentally, I have to file my defence before 6th September.

 

Chri

Link to post
Share on other sites

Att removed persinfo showing

Doesn't say will anywhere

 

But anyway they already have issued you a claim!!!!

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

Att removed persinfo showing

Doesn't say will anywhere

 

But anyway they already have issued you a claim!!!!

 

Thanks for the reply. Sorry about the attachment :-(

 

I think I should be looking at my defence tomorrow?

 

Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

by 4pm 06/09/2016

there are already defences filed here matching the poc you have

have a look

post it up here first

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

by 4pm 06/09/2016

there are already defences filed here matching the poc you have

 

 

I have had a look,

but I cannot find any defences matching mine at present.

That isn`t to say there aren`t any. I just cannot find them.

 

My defence is that the first notice or PCN came 5 months after the so-called contravention.

 

 

My understanding is that they have at most 28 days to issue that PCN.

 

 

Secondly, their photographs merely show the vehicle entering and exiting the car park.

There contention that no ticket was displayed has no proof.

they have no photograph of the vehicle in a bay without a ticket displayed.

 

This was a new vehicle bought only a few days before this so-called contravention.

My daughter uses it as a carer for me and she says she bought a ticket,

but may have entered an incorrect, but valid, registration.

 

I do not see that they7

have any valid proof and in any case their first PCN was out of date when it was sent.

 

If you think that is not right, please let me know.

 

Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

if this is their poc from post 8 here in your thread

 

 

1.The Claimants Claim is for the sum of £100 being the monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant in respect of a parking chargelink3.gif Notice(PCN) issued on 10/02/2015(Issue Date) at 14.41.06 at Peel Centre - Stockport Anpr Charging Scheme Std(60-100)

The PCN relates to Vauxhall under registration ******.

 

2.The terms of the PCN allowed the defendant 28 days from the Issue Date to pay the PCN, but the Defendant failed to do so.

Despite demand having been made, the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability.

 

3.The Claim also includes Statutory Interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum a daily rate of 0.02 from 10/02/2015 to 04/08/2016 being an amount of £10.84.

 

The Claimant alsi claims £54.00 contractual costs pursuant to PCN Terms and Conditions.

 

 

type in peel centre claimform in the search cag box of the top toolbar

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

so your defence is that

1. there is no cause for action against the defendant as there is no keeper liability inder the POFA as the claimant failed to follow the protocols of the act to create one.

2. the claim is that no ticket was purchased and displayed in the prescribed manner. This is denied and the claimant has offered no evidence that any action by the driver at the time has lead to a breach of this purported condition in the contract supposedly offered and accepted at the time.

3 that in any case, the driver paid the prescribed fee so no loss caused to the claimant and no other cause for action as there was no breach of contract.

 

Detail about each point will be given when the courts tell you to exchange documents. In the meanwhile get a copy of th signage at the entrance to the car park, any other signs and also what is written on the ticket machine. Most of this will show that what they claim is not a contract anyway as the signs should be clear and contain everything needed for offer and consideration If their one armed bandit has more or different terms on it then the signage isnt a contract anyway but an invitation to treat and you are allowed to consider and reject the small print elsewhere or on the ticket machine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your help.

I am aware that from your earlier post I have until 6th September to file my defence. I assume that the details to do that are on the original CC Claim Form?

I will get the information you have mentioned.

Incidentally, they have not responded to my CPR 31.14 request.

I will file that defence tomorrow and let you know when I have the information about signs etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You file your defence on the mcol website

Same as you did the AOS

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

The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature.

The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

 

1.the claimants solicitors have failed to respond to my CPR 31:14 request made on XXX by royalmail postal service requesting any documentation or relevant contracts with the land owners that allow the claimant to issue claims upon the landowners behalf.

 

 

2. there is no cause for action against the defendant as there is no keeper liability inder the POFA as the claimant failed to follow the protocols of the act to create one.

 

3. the claim is that no ticket was purchased and displayed in the prescribed manner. This is denied and the claimant has offered no evidence that any action by the driver at the time has lead to a breach of this purported condition in the contract supposedly offered and accepted at the time.

 

4 the driver paid the prescribed fee so no loss caused to the claimant and no other cause for action as there was no breach of contract.

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

I have submitted my defence. Unfortunately, I sent the wording supplied by `ericsbrother` this morning before I received the fuller version from `dx100UK`.

Presumably I can either amend it of submit the fuller version at a later stage?

Link to post
Share on other sites

no issue let it run

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...