Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are 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. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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 
        • 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
  • Recommended Topics

washtech.co.uk - Bosch washing machine cracked drum - outside of warranty - do i have to pay bosch to fix it now?


woking
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2478 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

Hello Guys,

 

I am looking for advice on best place to start with my issue.

 

I have 2 years 9 month old Bosch washing machine purchased from online retailer washtech.co.uk which suddenly developed sevaral cracks in the outside plastic drum.

 

Washing machine was working ok for a first year then touch screen controls started playing up and I got it repaired under warranty in October last year. No problem with controls since then but

 

today my garage got flooded by the water during drum clean cycle.

I took back panel off hoping it was a pump or waste pipe.

Unfortunately external plastic drum had at least two long cracks.

 

I understand I can try and get it fixed by retailer as it not lasted a reasonable amount time or fix it myself and then take them to small court if they refuse to pay for repairs.

 

I just wonder if I could try to start with Bosch to see if they agree to repair it free of charge or provide some sort of report or their view on the fault?

 

I was told by their technician that after repair they made I do not have any warranty (original warranty was running out in two weeks after they made repair).

 

I know some manufacturers extend warranty after repair by another year.

 

And Bosh themselves say they will give 12 month warranty on the appliance if they fix it.

But I guess it is meant when you pay them or could it apply to any repairs?

 

Thanks for reading!

Link to post
Share on other sites

nothing to do with any manufacturers warranty

they are in addition to your consumer rights under CRA

 

 

under CRA if you get a report done and fwd it to washtech then they are duty bound to investigate your complaint.

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

Thank you for your advice dx100uk.

 

I think in my case it would be SGA not CRA as I purchased it in Oct 2014.

 

Should I call seller in a first instance to discuss it before getting report? Maybe they can pay / arrange report to be done?

Once I have report can I contact washtech via e-mail or does it have to be recorded mail?

 

Is there specific wording you can suggest I can used to mention that claim is under SGA?

 

I was thinking something in the lines of:

 

I am making this claim under Sales of Goods Act 1979 amended.

I believe that there was manufacturing / design fault and washing machine was not durable as required by Sales of Goods Act 1979 amended.

According to several reports average lifespan of a washing machine is between 5 -15 years. (I can provide copy of online articles like this one https://www.whitegoodshelp.co.uk/how-long-should-a-washing-machine-last/

 

I would like you to arrange repair / replacement or refund money I paid for it.

 

If I arrange report myself but do not take seller to small court would I still be able to get money paid for report back?

 

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick update.

 

Had Bosh Engineer called out. He confirmed it was cracked drum and beyond economical repair but mentioned it was due to having foreign object probably coming out of pocket like coins.

I could probably get some sort of report from Bosh but as they seem to suggest it was my fault not sure if I can get far with that report.

 

Should I still try to go with it to the seller or try to get independent report?

Link to post
Share on other sites

both

did the boshman leave you a copy?

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 should be able to get copy from Bosch engineer in a couple of days.

Couple of independent repair companies I spoke to were not keen on making reports.

 

I think even independent report would probably mention foreign object which would suggest I will be at fault.

Not sure if the will be strong evidence to take seller to small court.

 

I think I'll call seller now and explain the situation probably mentioning that Bosch confirmed it is beyond economical repair, SGA and small court to get sellers view on that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have found two other people on facebook complaining about the same problem of a cracked drum - might be worth getting together with them over the experience....

 

I can't share a link, but if you type in "bosch washing machine cracked drum" in Facebooks search and then select, 'posts', you'll find others with your issue.... July and Aug last year and feb this year - so could be a design issue if you find enough evidence that you all haven't been mistreating your machines ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Fienderella,

 

I'll have look at these posts. Bosch insist it is not design fault as they do not get many reports on this issue.

They have not been helpful and could only offer repair at a fairly discounted rate but still just under £200!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course they are not going to get many reports on the issue - it requires people to say, 'yes' to the work being carried out for it to be properly recorded and considering they are going to charge you more than the cost of replacing, most will say 'no' so the only thing that would be reported instead would be the 'uneconomical to repair' part of the report - just like you experienced already :D Fingers crossed you find others and can collectively get something done or at least highlight you are not the first and probably won't be the last :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick update:

 

Spoke to the seller on a few occasions but we disagree on the principal issue of who is liable to the repair cost (even though Bosch have now agreed to cap it at £95).

I am moving my conversations with the seller to written format. Sending them e-mail and hard copy letter asking to pay for the repairs giving 7 days to reply but do not have much hope of resolving it with them direct.

For some weird reason seller is panning to forward my correspondence to Bosch :)

 

I guess my next step would need to be to follow pre-action protocol.

 

Any thoughts would be appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...