Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
    • quite honestly id email shiply CEO with that crime ref number and state you will be taking this to court, for the full sum of your losses, if it is not resolved ASAP. should that be necessary then i WILL be naming Shiply as the defendant. this can be avoided should the information upon whom the courier was and their current new company contact details, as the present is simply LONDON VIRTUAL OFFICES  is a company registered there and there's a bunch of other invisible companies so clearly just a mail address   
    • If it doesn’t sell easily : what they can get at an auction becomes fair market price, which may not realise what you are hoping.
    • Thank you. The receiver issue is a rabbit hole I don't think I'm going to enjoy going down. These people seem so protected. And I don't understand how or why?  Fair market value seems to be ever shifting and contentious.
    • Hungary is attempting to be a world power in manufacturing electric vehicle batteries, despite locals' reservations.View the full article
  • 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
      • 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

Advice for friend


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6391 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 am looking for advice on behalf of my friend, who is a single mum and can ill afford these charges. She has contacted The Abbey and requested £840 that has been taken from her in the past few years. They have offered her £180 as a gesture of goodwill. She wants to accept and I have said not to as she has to fight this. She is scared she wont get anything if she writes back and says no. What should she say in the next letter??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

I say YES accept what the Abbey offers as "Goodwill" payments but write immediatly stating clearly that you are accepting this amount as PART SETTLEMENT of full amount claimed only. This must be in the letter.

We received an offer of £575 yesterday (ashamed to say this is no where near our amount over the 6years claim!!). The letter was dated 20th October and we received it 27th.

We sent a letter back accepting it but stated in capital letters that it was only part payment and we were still claming the full amount. Obviously less the payment made.

However, last night we discovered they had already paid the goodwill money into our account. All dated 25th October £30, 25th October £20 etc. However, despite their offer of £575 we only received £535!!! A bank and they can't even count!!!! We hadnt even received their letter offering this before they paid it into our account!!!

So yet again I wrote to them today making it perfectly clear we were accepting the 535 and pointed out it wasnt even the amount offered as goodwill.

I ensured they would fully understand that it was only accepted as part payment. (as read that others have been stung by not stating this.)

We then made out a list stating it would ensure there would be no misunderstandings on either of our parts.

I also pointed out that they had their last 14 day deadline as from the 26th October then we fully intend taking further action. I stated that no letter saying they were passing it onto another member of their team would be accepted. They did this before.

We copied and pasted their payments into our account from our online statement and sent that too.

With every other letter we have enclosed a statement of charges levied against us.

So my advice is take the goodwill payments but make it perfectly clear to them that it is only part payment and you are still going for full refund. If you decide to accept a further % payment ensure the % is of the full amount not the full amount less the part payment.

That's my advice anyway and what we are doing. What do you have to lose?

L

never say never
:cool:
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...