Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Your page numbers should run through your WX and exhibits so im concerned its page x of 9.
    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • UK travellers have been turned away at airports because their passports are not valid for EU travel.View the full article
    • i think theres been MORE than amble evidence of that and am astonished that criminal proceedings haven't begun.
    • Yep, those 'requirements' not met to shareholders satisfaction seem to me to be: 1. Not being allowed to increase customer bills by 40% (of which well over 50% of the new total would NOT be investment) 2. 1 plus regulators not agreeing to letting them do 'things in their own time (ie carry on regardless)
  • 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
      • 160 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

More Northwest Mini Centre Glossop....


Stotty157
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2376 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

I know Chris very well and have done for many years.

Sadly it seems I'm another one of his victims.

 

I paid Chris £600 upfront in January this year to repaint my mk 4 golf anniversary.

He stated that as the body shop side of his business was quiet over winter he could do mine between other jobs and it would be done in 3-4 weeks from then.

 

Nearly 6 months later and I'm still waiting.

The car is sat in the same place I parked it back in January.

 

Last month (April) I had a talk with him and told him I wanted the car and cash back and that i would get the work done elsewhere.

 

He promised to crack on with it and days later the bumpers, lights etc were removed,

now we are back to square one with my car sat rotting away.

It's been there that long there's 3mm of tree sap caked on the car.

Chris avoids replying to my texts.

 

I've been told by a very good friend of Chris's that he has over 40 cars waiting for extensive restoration work

the majority of customers having paid upfront all to lavish Chris's lifestyle.

 

His friend admitted he doubted any of the cars would ever get done and that it was only a matter of time before he 'Did a flit' back to his belovied Cornwall.

 

His working week consists of 3 days now.

Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday.

On Thursday evening he travels down to Cornwall returning Tuesday.

 

He's well aware of the comments on this forum and reckons most is liable and that he's tried several times to get it taken down but to no avail.

 

Posts claiming people have served court papers on him are also false according to him with most of the negative comments coming from a disgruntled ex member of staff that was sacked - the guy lives in fairy land.

 

I don't know how the guy has the brass neck to continue taking money off people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Yes he's still trading apparently.

Two of his customers had their cars recovered yesterday (Monday 26th) by recovery companies. Chris was no where to be seen and left it all to his business partner who looked embarrassed by the whole thing and claimed he works independantly of Chris - personally I think this is rubbish but hey ho.

There's rumours locally he's about to do a flit so act quickly !

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have copies of court papers which were issued against him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Just a quick update.

 

Chris told me last week he didn't have the cash or means to finish my car and that I was welcome to pick up when I wanted too but as he had 'prepped' the car for paint, removed the bumpers, lights etc he was keeping the cash as he had technically started the work.

 

I've been told tonight that he's been caught by one of his angry customers trying to do a flit with his toolbox and some of his equipment strapped to his trailer all hooked up to his discovery.

 

The trailer/equipment have been seized by the customer until his car and cash are returned.

 

We went up tonight mainly to weigh up my Golf but there's still lots of vehicles -mainly minis in his rear yard.

 

His workshop is apparently empty with all ramps and equipment gone.

 

Can I suggest if you have vehicles still there you arrange to collect them asap.

I would imagine the unit will be quickly re-let.

 

There's a lot of very angry people locally who he owes money too including me!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am just gathering everything I have to go to a solicitor on Monday, I have pictures from 2014 just before Chris picked up my mini and it is in better condition then, than it does now (3years and £2k later)

 

How have you got on regarding the solicitor?? I am keen to take action but just wonder if there's any point for a £600 debt. I have no paperwork it was a verbal agreement but I do have texts where he's told me to bring the car and money down on a certain day and he will crack on with it.

 

Interestingly a local company he owes money too is taking him individually to court and not the business as they reckon they have a better chance of getting the money back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interestingly a local company he owes money too is taking him individually to court and not the business as they reckon they have a better chance of getting the money back.

 

If the company is insolvent ; it doesn't matter if you have a cast-iron case, and obtain judgment, as there is nothing to enforce against.

The hurdle they will face is in showing that he (the individual) is liable instead of the company - they may be willing to say "we'd win against the company but it'd do us no good, so we'll chance our arm against the individual" - it depends on their circumstances (they might, for example, have had a personal guarantee given, making the individual liable).

Link to post
Share on other sites

if liquidators are going in Monday there's no point me taking him to the small claims court?

 

I just wonder given that 9 months after dropping my car off in a driveable state for a paint job it now looks like it's out of a scrap yard and will need trailerling away could i not try and go down the criminal road and have him done for fraud and criminal damage??

Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically if liquidators are going in Monday there's no point me taking him to the small claims court?

 

As a general guide, I'd suggest a potential litigant ask themselves (if self-represented) or their legal advisor 2 questions:

a) what are my chances of obtaining a judgment, and

b) If I obtain a judgment, can I enforce it (else it becomes a hollow victory).

 

I just wonder given that 9 months after dropping my car off in a driveable state for a paint job it now looks like it's out of a scrap yard and will need trailerling away could i not try and go down the criminal road and have him done for fraud and criminal damage??

 

Fraud by false representation : you'd have to show he knowingly gave a false representation (that exposed you to a risk of loss, etc. etc. ).

Companies fail all the time, that doesn't mean it is fraud, and the level of proof for a criminal conviction is "beyond reasonable doubt" ..... so a criminal case is a possibility, but likely wouldn't happen unless there was felt to be a realistic prospect of a conviction.

 

Criminal damage?.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/48/section/1

"A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an offence."

 

So he could claim that acts in preparation for improvements aren't damage....... (I'm not saying a court would agree, but he might claim it!), or that he had "lawful excuse"

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/48/section/5

"if at the time of the act or acts alleged to constitute the offence he believed that the person or persons whom he believed to be entitled to consent to the destruction of or damage to the property in question had so consented, or would have so consented to it if he or they had known of the destruction or damage and its circumstances;"

 

You agreed he could work on the car?.

If I need an extension building, and know that the builder will have to take down a wall, then the taking down of the wall isn't criminal damage : at the time of the damage the builder believes I'm entitled to consent and that I consent.

If the builder then goes insolvent and doesn't build my extension, that doesn't make it criminal damage, as the statute refers to "the time of the act".

 

What did you think he'll say he believed at the time of the act?

 

Again, to avoid a successful prosecution (or prosecution at all, as the CPS wont proceed unless there is a realistic prospect of success), all he need do is introduce "reasonable doubt"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Latest update - chris has gone AWOL. Steve and Mark have taken over workshop and want all cars gone by end September. Derbyshire police very interested in this case as below. Lots of people have been defrauded.

 

People affected need to ring 101... press # for alternative station and say Derbyshire. Then get through to that constabulary (if you are not from round there).

 

You can quote this incident number and it will make a bigger case. If you can get in to make a statement then great!

 

Ex-employees / customers alike!

 

EDIT: CASE NUMBER 797250917

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...