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

what should i do next *** WON ***


mbdiss
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6266 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

Sounds like RBS are being inundated!!

If my post has been useful, tip my scales and let me know

 

Always start with the User guide!

Stuck with RBS charges? Click here!!

 

RBS CA1 £2794 SETTLED!!! RBS CA2 £503 SETTLED!!! HBOS CC £498 SETTLED!!! Barclaycard £705 (with CCI) ONGOING!!! NATWEST CA ONGOING!!! LLOYDS CA x 2, CC, LOAN ONGOING!!! HFC LOAN ONGOING!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 136
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 4 weeks later...

Oh, dramas, panic, nosediving confidence...the usual stuff.

 

I've got 8 days to submit AQ. Nearly ready, but just looking at some new stuff thats developing, so may delay a day or so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi hydra looks like i'm right behind you then. This is the defence that i got today. I need to read Through it again but i think it is the standered defence. so if any experts out there could give me some pointers would be greatful.

 

 

 

1. This Defence is filed and served without prejudice to the Defendant’s case that the Particulars of Claim do not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim against the Claimant to recover the bank charges (and interest thereon) referred to in the Particulars of Claim or any other sum(s). In the event that the Claim is not properly particularised then the Defendant will apply to strike out the claim and/or for summary judgement in respect of the same.

 

2. On allocation the Defendant invites the Court to direct that there be a case management conference in order for the Court to consider the making of appropriate orders to give the Claimant the opportunity to properly particularise the claim.

 

3. No admissions are made as to what charges have been debited to the Claimant’s bank account.

 

4. In relation to the allegation that the contractual provisions pursuant to which the charges have been applied are unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (“UCTA 1977”) and/or the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999 (“the Regulations”) and/or the common law, the Claimant is required to identify:

 

4.1 (a) the section(s) of The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (“UCTA 1977”); (b) the regulations of The Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999 (“the Regulations”); and © the principles of common law relied upon by the Claimant in alleging that the contractual provision(s) referred to are unenforceable; and

4.2 the contractual provision(s) that the Claimant allege are invalid by reference to UCTA 1977 and/or the Regulations.

 

Until such time as these sections/regulations/provisions are identified the Defendant cannot (save as appears below) plead to the allegation referred to in paragraph 4 above. The Defendant therefore reserves its right to plead further to the allegation once (and if) the Claimant identifies the relevant contractual information.

 

5. In relation to the case of the Claimant that the charges are unreasonable within the meaning of section 15 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 (“SGSA”) the Defendant pleads as follows:

 

5.1 The Claimant is required to plead and prove the necessary factors (referred to in section 15 SGSA) concerning the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant which mean that pursuant to SGSA section 15 there is an implied term that the Claimant pay a reasonable charge for the service under the contract.

5.2 Further, the Claimant is required to plead and prove (a) that the bank charges which have been debited are unreasonable; (b) all facts and matters relied upon by the Claimant in support of this case and © what charges would have been reasonable.

5.3 In the circumstances no grounds are disclosed for a claim that the Defendant has acted in breach of SGSA section 15.

5.4 In the circumstances (save as appears below) the Defendant is unable to plead to this allegation beyond denying that it has acted in reach of SGSA 15 section as alleged or at all. The Defendant reserves its right to plead further to this allegation once (and if) the defects in the pleaded case referred to in paragraphs 5.1-5.3 above are addressed.

5.5 It is the case of the Defendant that the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant does not fall within SGSA section 15 because (a) the consideration for the service would be determined by the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant and (b) was not left to be determined in a manner agreed by the contract or determined by the course of dealings between the Claimant and the Defendant.

 

6. Save as hereinbefore appears the Defendant joins issue with the Claimant on the claim(s) and denies that it is liable to the Claimant as alleged or at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty much same as mine, mate, 'cept I've got a paragraph about Limitation and Laches.

 

Lot's of good stuff around to help as well! Let me know if I can help...

 

 

Phil

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi hydra thanks i think i will be needing some help just need to re-read it again.

 

got this letter today for some reason

 

 

Dear Mr mbdiss

 

I am currently considering your claim regarding charges applied to your account. As your account is now closed this has resulted in a delay in gathering the informationwe we require to assess your claim.

 

Please accept my apologies for this and please be assured that we will respond to you as soon as possible

 

your sincerely

sandy watt

 

 

 

not sure why RBS have sent me this but hey will have to see what happens

Link to post
Share on other sites

ur assuming THEY know why they they sent it...lol

 

There's solutions to everything they've written in their defence. Don't let the legalese baffle you. What they are basically saying is they want you to do half their work for them.

 

Couple of ways to attack this so don't worry, might have to do it off thread tho, just in case they have some office junior in here spying ;)

 

But there's gonna be lot's of reading....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep pushing guys, I was due to see them @ end March following AQ etc. Fear loathing and panic was setting in when Xmas came late wink wink.. just get ready and get that paperwork in..

__________________

HSBC £3829.00 Prelim letter sent 17/7/06 :wink:

£1996.00 Offered 9/8/06 :rolleyes: .. See you in Court!

MCOL Filed 15/08/06 :)

DG response asking for info 8/9/06

 

RBOS S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 12/07/06 :cool:

Prelim letter sent 29/8/06 £2552 requested!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm just wondering should i reply to this letter??

 

hi hydra thanks i think i will be needing some help just need to re-read it again.

 

got this letter today for some reason

 

 

Dear Mr mbdiss

 

I am currently considering your claim regarding charges applied to your account. As your account is now closed this has resulted in a delay in gathering the informationwe we require to assess your claim.

 

Please accept my apologies for this and please be assured that we will respond to you as soon as possible

 

your sincerely

sandy watt

 

 

 

not sure why RBS have sent mew this but hey will have to see what happens

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sandy Watt again....just ignore it mate.

 

Or if your feeling polite you could reply pointing out that as proceedings had commenced he was a bit behind the times....Full settlement at his earliest convenience, sorta thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Our Sandy is feeling the strain. Did pretty much the same to me offering me over £600 when I wrote directly to them querying why they had taken £38 out of my account when I was in credit!! I wouldn't bother replying! Think they are inundated with post at moment.

:)RBS - Settled in full -3k
Link to post
Share on other sites

I followed the new strategy for AQs

 

See the below link if you haven't already.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/53570-new-strategy-allocation-questionaires.html

 

Just be mindful that once it is submitted, get on top of completing your court bundle. I'm currently doing this now.

 

 

RBS Account 1: Won

RBS Account 2: Won

Capital One: Won

Capital One (Wifes Card): Won

RBS Account 2, round 2: Won

RBS PPI: Won

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brill!!!

 

What happened??

If my post has been useful, tip my scales and let me know

 

Always start with the User guide!

Stuck with RBS charges? Click here!!

 

RBS CA1 £2794 SETTLED!!! RBS CA2 £503 SETTLED!!! HBOS CC £498 SETTLED!!! Barclaycard £705 (with CCI) ONGOING!!! NATWEST CA ONGOING!!! LLOYDS CA x 2, CC, LOAN ONGOING!!! HFC LOAN ONGOING!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

CONGRATULATIONS MB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

soooooooooooo PLEASED FOR YOU!!!!

If my advice has helped please click my scales

 

Should you require any further help feel free to pm me.

Nat West 2nd Acc

Prelim letter sent 8th Feb '07

:) Full Settlement Offer 24th Feb '07:)

:pMONEY BACK IN ACC ON MARCH THE FIRST '07:p

 

 

Nat West 1st Acc

Filed at court 2nd of Feb '07

Acknowledged on 15th of Feb '07

:rolleyes: Defence submitted 1st March 2007 :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brill!!!

 

What happened??

 

not much really T4FF got a letter with cheque for full amount with the normal conditions and i'm happy with them so hey ho of to the bank we go. :D :D :D :D

 

and thanks guys and girls for the congrats. i'm not going away tho cos here we come cap one

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...