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
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2180 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

Hi and welcome to CAG

 

I agree with everyone so far. It may be that the security company will pass the photo on to other stores which are part of a shop/store watch scheme. This photo cannot be placed in an area seen by the public. As for a town banning order. Nah! You can go into other shops but the store security may follow you around. The police do have different rules on what they can do but as they were not involved, nothing will come of that.

 

Anybody going into any shop/store is there by invitation only and any store can ask you to leave for whatever reason they want however many shops want your (legitimate) business.

I would stay out of B&Q for about 6 months and by that time they should have forgotten about you but you would be a trespasser and they can still ask you to leave.

 

From the 25th of this month, the new Data Protection rules come into place and no one is allowed to charge you the old £10 fee. They will also have only 30 days to supply your data instead of the old 40 days rule.

Ensure that if you do send the request , that you want details of the store security company. I don't know if B&Q have their own store security or whether they pay a private company to do this on their behalf.

 

As for any begging letters, ignore them. It is likely that the people contacting you will be RLP although there is another company that does the same and they are called DWF. The only time to react is if a 'Letter Before Action' arrives or if they bypass the Pre Action Protocols and send you court papers. Highly unlikely they will do anything at all but better be forewarned than ignorant.

 

After all my waffle:

1 Don't do it again as you will be more likely to get a police visit and makes us on CAG look silly.

2 Ignore RLP/DWF and any 'pet' debt collector

3 When you get the letters, post them here (suitably redacted of ALL personal data) in pdf format

4 Work out the reasons you felt that stealing was OK.

  • Confused 1

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that letter is all you will receive however, if any other letters arrive, let us know.

 

 

"They MAY disseminate" is a bit vague but nothing much to worry about. If they did pass it between other members of the scheme, they are duty bound to protect that data from falling into the wrong hands so although your employer has links to the council, this wouldn't show.

 

 

With these schemes, businesses liaise with the police and the councils to ensure that they follow the rules hence the logos at the bottom of the letter. All it means is that thepolice and the council have approved the scheme and share the values committed to by the stores.

 

 

12 months will pass very quickly and you will soon forget this ever happened. Another thing to note. If you change jobs in the future, if you are asked if you have a criminal record, you can honestly say no. Even if a job included an enhanced CRB check, this won't show.

 

 

Try to get on with your life and treat this single incident as a learning experience.

 

 

Good Luck :-)

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...