Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All
Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.
Latest activity

Council tax debt - equita bailiffs clamped Mrs car

Alan the cat
 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2020 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

Alan the cat

Alan the cat

Posted
Posted

Hello everyone

 

I had equita bailiffs clamp my Mrs car for my outstanding ctax bill.

She showed them her v5, insurance etc but they said they needed a receipt of purchase (which she didn't have with her at the time but has since found) to prove it was hers. They clamped the car and said they'd be back in the morning.

 

The police were called and allsorts.

 

If they don't accept the v5, insurance (in her name I'm not even a named driver), mot and the purchase receipt

can I just sit on the car and refuse to let them take it?

 

I'm going to be putting a complaint in anyway.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
dx100uk

dx100uk

Posted
Posted

she is equally liable.

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
dx100uk

dx100uk

Posted
Posted

well you didn't say that.

 

still needs paying

why has it come to this.

 

tell us the full story please.

 

dx

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
dx100uk

dx100uk

Posted
Posted

ok .. who is it Marstons?

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
Bailiff Advice

Bailiff Advice

Posted
Posted
It was Equita.

 

They have actually secretly came back and removed the clamp without even knocking! They must have realised they were getting nothing.

 

Given the popularity of this forum, I would like to make point for anyone else viewing this thread in the future......under the regulations introduced in 2014, a bailiff IS permitted to seize 'jointly owned goods'. I appreciate that in your particular case, your marital situation is different to most couples but I would not like other people to think that just because a wife or husband owes a particular item that it cannot be seized because IT CAN.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
dx100uk

dx100uk

Posted
Posted

numerous discussions posts moved to their own thread here

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?491103-Council-tax-debt-who-is-responsible-to-pay&p=5157780#post5157780

 

to the OP Alan the cat

 

please post here when you have any developments.

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
ss002d6252

ss002d6252

Posted
Posted

The OP has stated his partner is not resident at the property with him so she cannot be held jointly liable for the council tax charge on the property under s6 or s9 of the LGFA 1992. If she had been resident she would have been jointly liable under s6 or s9 (except in the case of an odd situation under s9 but there's nothing to suggest that applies here). It looks like the council took all this in account and the liability order is correctly against the OP.

 

The above being said, the specific enforcement of the liability order by the enforcement agents is actioned separately to the legislation which lead up to the granting of the order. As can be seen in this case TACE (and it's surrounding legislation) does not always sit easily or nicely with council tax legislation.

 

A couple living separately may well have intertwined interest in goods sufficient to satisfy Schedule 12 but a look at each and every situation would be needed to make the determination of ownership.

Link to post
Share on other sites
dx100uk

dx100uk

Posted
Posted

I suppose the Q needs asking is if she WAS resident at the home in 2015?

 

alan?

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
  • 4 weeks later...
Peterbard

Peterbard

Posted
Posted
I suppose the Q needs asking is if she WAS resident at the home in 2015?

 

alan?

 

This is a little irritating DX. SS is a very knowledgeable poster, but there are others on here also. What he says is more or less what I said.

 

 

We posted to help the OP understand the legal situation, so why were these posts removed. I did not invite discussion. I think you are letting your personal feelings influence your moderation.

 

Someone asking for clarification does not mean the comments should be removed.

 

Surely it is for the poster to decide if he wants a discussion or to contribute, you run the frisk of discouraging our more clued up members, and really for no reason.

 

Of course , if the thread becomes argumentative something must be done, but this is an open forum, moving posts because you consider them to be too technical, is not helpful, the op can always get clarification on the thread. Besides the poster may fully understand what is being said.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites
AndyOrch

AndyOrch

Posted
Posted

Are you on the correct thread here Dodge ?

 

No posts have been moved or anything moderated ?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
Peterbard

Peterbard

Posted
Posted

Yes half a dozen windows open. I will send you some examples if you wish.

Apologies to the OP for disturbing this thread.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites
AndyOrch

AndyOrch

Posted
Posted

No thanks that wont be necessary...just be careful in future to post your comments to the correct thread.

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...