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

CPS ANPR PCN - overstay - Spring St, Hull HU2 8RA ***Cancelled***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 242 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

not a legal NTK,

they say they have photographic evidence but fail to include it and also they dont have a correct service address,

companies cannot use a PO Box No when sending out NTK's so that means they have failed to create ANY liability,

let alone a keeper liability.

 

You are right about the lack of keeper liability as it was sent too late for that.

 

Do not appeal this but keep the letter safe and in the meanwhle get us some pictures of the site entrance and any signage present there and in the car park if possible. If there is a payment meter then pictures of that and any associated blurb.

 

From what I see on google noseyparker there is just a sign saying terms and conditions apply see notice around for details with no info on who the signs belong to or indication that you may be asked to pay any a million quid if you dont agree with them.

 

At the moment your brother holds all of the chips but dont let him panic and hand them victory on a plate just to make this go away.

 

They will bother him for quite a while but if you read a good bundle of the threads you will see that IPC memebrs generally chuck the towel in because they are poorly served by the solicitors who own the IPC

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Indeed very odd wording, it appears to say that you pay £100 for parking as a condition of entering the land but no mention of any terms for a breach of contract. Confusing at best, esp if they have payment machines as then you shouldnt get a receipt until you have fed £100 into the machine. No such thing as an overstay, nothing about parking over the limes or the use of disabled bays.

Company details are PO Box as already said so no clarity on who is offering you anything.

 

However, I dont agree that sending a letter at this stage will do any good, anyone this stupid isnt going to accept the truth is at variance with their greed. Also Will and John at the IPC claim they vet every sign so their trade association as just as thick as they are.

Let them waste their time and money a bit longer, when you get to a proper threat of court from Will and John at Gladstones

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

they hope that you think they have some powers or authority and are scared into apying them this amount before it goes up again.  they stick to under £200 as they know peopel will query any amount above that and the find out that nothing can be added at all!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

so they are telling you to pay a third party rather than them or their client.

Spreading the jam a bit thin arent they?

No it isnt a LBA so sit tight for the moment

 

As for multiple car parks, you need to be able to show where your car was parked and find out who owns the land for each of the three. There will be different contracts for each even if the signs are the same they wont apply to  separate patches of land and identifiable as a single place so postcode of place is critical.

 

according to royalmail it covers 35-39 spring st so go and check who owns the properties by asking the council business rates people or the Valuations Agency. They are sometimes very helpful and sometimes as awkward as civil servants can get so dont be put off if you are rebuffed first time.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to CPS ANPR PCN - overstay - Spring St, Hull HU2 8RA

the wording of the second letter may get them into trouble as it fails to explain HOW all of the threats could result in any of the actions being taken.

 

they fail to mention that they have to go to court and win for starters

so heading it a pre enforcement letter is utterly wrong and stating that "after applications have been granted" and a list of impacts is an abuse of the civil procedure as the application is for issuing a summons.

 

they make a big thing out of their infamy of being on the telly when it is entirely irrelevant

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...