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

Zinc / CRS/ Xercise4less

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2652 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

Hi there,


I was first contacted by The Zinc Group on 24/02/2017 asking me for £171.47 for their client 'CRS on behalf of Xercise 4 Less'.


I was a member of the Nottingham branch of this gym during my final year of university, and I paid the minimum of 11 monthly instalments of £9.99 between 26/10/16 and 25/08/2016.


After this point,

I had already moved away from nottingham

I just cancelled my direct debit and assumed that would be the end of it.


I now realise I made a mistake and should have notified the gym that I wanted to cancel.


Since the first email from Zinc,

I have received two others,

the first offering a reduced one-off payment of £128.60, and then another asking for the full amount around a week later. I have not yet responded to any of the emails.


Having read numerous other threads on this topic I realise I should not pay the full amount, although I do accept that I made a mistake so would be willing to pay something, just not the extortionate fee that they are demanding.


Do you have any advice as to what (if any) move I should make?


Any help would be greatly appreciated. :-)


N.B. The address they have for me is my old uni address, so I think the only correct information they have on me is my email address.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Adon and welcome to CAG


It's important that Harlands/CRS have your current address so you always know what they're up to.


Use one (or more) of my letters to tell Harlands (not CRS or Zinc) :-


1. Your current address is xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for all future letters but they shouldn't waste too much paper as you won't be paying them a penny more.


2. You paid all you agreed to for the 11 months that you originally committed to, so you will pay nothing more.


Keep the letter v short and send to Harlands Haywards Heath address.


No need to reply at all to the begging letter from Zinc.



We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING



                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group


Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.


Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just remember no dca has any powers whatsoever

They are not bailiffs

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...