Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Please also take photos of the sign at the entrance as well as any signs inside the car park especially any that are different. Please take them from a distance where we can read them and if there is a payment machine, the sign on the machine or very close to it that explains their T&Cs for the machine.
    • Thanks for getting the signage posted up so quickly. The sign on entry should explain their T&Cs. As they don't it means that  what they have given you is  an offer to treat, not a contract. For there to be a contract they would have had to put their offer at the entrance.  You cannot put a notice saying that their T&Cs are inside the car park and expect motorists to be subject to those T&Cs when they are unaware what the terms are.. They have to be able to read them and understand them before they can accept them. My feeling is that the sign that includes the charge of £100 is too small to be acceptable On top of that the sign at the entrance is for Parking Control Solutions while the signs inside are from HX Management-a completely different animal. To strengthen your case for not paying them is the fact that their PCN is not compliant.  Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 there are certain wordings in  the NTK  that by Law must comply with the Act. They don't  have to quote that part of the Act in their PCN but the relevant wording has to be included. PoFA Schedule 4 paragraph 9 [2]   the notice must  [f]   warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given— (i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;   Your  NTK does not include  [if all the applicable conditions  under the Schedule have been met ]thus rendering the NTK non compliant.  
    • I agree its about time but why has it taken for the National Crime Agency to flag this up for then to take action and not Ofcom.   Yet again a Government Agency that is meant to deal with this hasn't Ofcom but flagged by another Agency NCA.   If the telephone companies have this facility in place already to do this then why hasn't Ofcom been pushing them to stop all these scam calls and giving them massive fines for not doing so.    
    • Hi   Send this to them:   Dear Sir/Madam   Formal Complaint   Reference:            (insert their complaint reference number here)   Thank you for your response letter dated XX/XX/2021 which I received by email on XX/XX/2021 that contained your Original Email sent that showed due to your Maladministration that you had sent the Original Email containing my Personal Data to an incorrect email address due to spelling errors in the email address.   a)      Due to this Maladministration of this email being sent to the incorrect email address this email contained my Personal Data which is a Data Protection Breach therefore I require clarification from yourselves that this Breach has been reported to your Data Protection Officer and what action is being taken to ensure that my Personal Data contained in that Original Email has not been read by the recipient that you sent that email to with the incorrect email address.   As the email was sent by yourselves to my correct email address containing the original email showing the incorrect email address was due to spelling errors (maladministration) your IT Department will be able to obtain those emails sent.   If I do not get a satisfactory response that this has been dealt with by your Data Protection Officer, I will report this Data Breach to the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/   b)      Due to this Maladministration I failed to receive your Stage 1 complaint response within the allocated time limit for a Stage 1 response therefore this complaint should be dealt with as a Stage 2 Complaint and if you refuse to treat this as a Stage 2 Complaint, I require Full Clarification for your refusal.   I was placed in this Tenancy via the Rough Sleepers Initiative and I find your response about damaged/destroyed items that you would not be able to look into this as this happened 2 years ago but all tenants regardless of private or social housing are responsible for arranging their own contents insurance totally unacceptable as again, I was never notified nor informed of this requirement on taking up this tenancy.   I require clarification from yourself that when a New Tenant takes up a Tenancy Agreement with yourselves why are the not informed of this requirement of Contents Insurance which you should be duty bound to inform all tenants on taking up a tenancy agreement if such a requirement and it should also be noted within that tenants Housing File which you have full access to as dealing with complaint so I require clarification as well if this is noted in my Housing File.   You state multiple properties throughout the area were affected by sewage flood on the same day and the issue will have stemmed from the mains which is not your responsibility.   a)      You have failed to take into that the above statement from yourself blaming the Mains is without any actual evidence from yourselves to back up this claim therefore I require clarification as to what actual evidence you have and to be provided with copies.   b)      You also failed to take into account that in my initial complaint letter that on 12th July 2021 basement flats 1 & 2 were flooded by sewage exacerbated by blockage in the property’s drainage. The blockage has been confirmed by two contractors after the flooding including CCR who were subcontracted by Pyramid Plus that it was the properties drainage that was blocked. Also, while I was decanted from this property, I was contacted by CCR who confirmed that the drain was blocked but they could not access manhole as it was inaccessible as it is located in a utility cupboard underneath carpet, floorboards so how could this be the Main and not your responsibility when it is within the properties boundaries.   Your response about how complaints have been made by residents in relation to this issue is that your system does not allow you to find that information is completely unacceptable as your Housing Association should be able to produce these as part of ongoing repairs and maintenance/procurement processes to present these to your Board for there yearly Budget meeting if not why not.   Then you state you are under no obligation to share that information; therefore, your organisation is not being Open and Accountable to your Service Users and under which Article of the General Data Protection Act (GDPR) are you using for this refusal.   You have also failed to mention that I can make that above request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOI) and what is your process for such a request again not being Open and Accountable.   I await your response.
    • RE: EC261 Compensation   It's normal they won't have asked you to contact them . Your initial rescheduling was obviously done by a bot - and there was no human to notice the mistake, as far as the bot knew your scheduling was perfectly normal so there was no need to ask you to contact them.   As long as that was done 2 weeks in advance the carrier's liability to notify you is fulfilled.   (You could have contacted them there and pointed out that the new schedule was impossible. Unfortunately you didn't. Claiming you didn't notice is not likely to work in your favor)   The bot who sent you the 24h confirmation didn't notice the mistake either, obviously.   At some point a human or another bot finally identified the problem and that's when they called you. As far as they are concerned neither you nor them had noticed the scheduling mistake and they took it on them to notify you so you don't have a bad surprise when you try and check in.   However as far as I know, neither flight was delayed or cancelled. You could have taken both flights, if you had the power to be in two places at the same time.   So I don't think there is any scope to claim for EC261. But claim forms are free so feel free to try.     Then, you can certainly make an old fashioned claim (directly to BA)   What could perhaps play in your favor:   It's the carrier's responsibility to ensure that they don't sell you a ticket where the flyer cannot meet the minimum connection time or MCT.   This situation mostly applies to situations where the flyer doesn't know and gets caught. For example say you connect at LHR and you are given 35 minutes to connect. This may look just fine to an unsuspecting tourist, but in reality there is practically zero chance to make the connection, therefore the airline is liable here for selling you this ticket resulting in you missing your connection   In your case though it could be argued that even an unsuspecting tourist should be able to tell that it is not possible for them to depart 5 minutes prior to disembarking and therefore that you should have checked your notification more carefully.   The fact that the bot allowed such a glaring mistake to happen is certainly an argument in your favour shall you decide to make a complaint.     What doesn't play in your favor:   The airline obviously did their best to get you to your destination as soon as they noticed their mistake. They offered you more than one alternative (the first alternative would have got you in time at your destination, but you declined) and you then accepted another alternative, and fully travelled the ticket. That is a very strong position for them.     What did you lose and what do you intend to claim for?   You took the overnight connection so obviously you had to stay at an airport hotel. Is that correct? Did you keep the receipt for your hotel and meals?   You certainly should have asked them on the phone when negotiating your re-route that they provide a hotel. Within 20hrs of the flight it's something they would most probably not have denied to you (but airlines will generally avoid offering off the bat. Why lose money when a customer is just going to roll with it and pay for their own stay anyway, right?). After the fact it's going to be a lot more difficult to claim.   I do certainly think it would be reasonable to try and write them a polite but firm letter to claim for that. Not 700 euros, not damages and hardship and all that jazz, just the extra expense you incurred following a scheduling mistake that they made (that should have never happened) and that they didn't notice until way too late in the day , with your categorical inability to leave 3 hours earlier (you had very important business meetings or something critical, it certainly wasn't just convenience) and the extra costs incurred, and asking that they kindly provide compensation for the hotel and meals, which you feel it was their duty to offer you and you are politely disappointed that they didn't, and thafully you happen to have kept all the receipts. Put Alex Cruz on copy for good measure.   No guarantee but I feel it has a fair chance of success. Most probably you will be offered a heap of Avios instead of cash. It's then up for you to decide whether you want to accept that. Personally I wouldn't bother going further, but that's just me. See if anyone here disagrees, and do let us know what you decide and keep in touch with how it went.            
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

@Inchcapeuk Burton Upon Trent avoiding their consumer obligations


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 405 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

It doesn't have to be in question of sharp practice. I don't think most firms practice in that kind of way but when things go wrong then they don't really know how to react and they start pulling up the barriers thinking that they are doing their company a favour but they're not.

Final question here – how much of this were you aware of? It seems to me that you should probably go to court on this with an excellent chance of success – but is it at all possible that they will say that you were aware that the car had not been serviced when you made the contract?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, if the car was due a service when you bought it – and they didn't tell you that it hadn't been serviced then I think that you were entitled to consider that it had been properly serviced and inspected.
You are entitled to have a vehicle of satisfactory quality blah blah taken into consideration any description, claims made, price paid – and other circumstances surrounding the sale.

This is a car which cost over £17,000. We are not talking about an old banger.

If they wrote to you and told you that it had been serviced then I think you were entitled to assume that it was the service for that level of mileage – which according to you would be quite a comprehensive service – and according to them would normally cost over £800. Is that an appropriate summary of the value of the service?

On that basis, as long as you don't find anything to show that the lower level of service was communicated to you then I think that you have a very high chance of success in the County Court if you decide to bring an action.

Furthermore, I can't imagine that they will push you to a hearing for this kind of money. Don't forget that £845 for service probably means that their profit margin is going to be at least one third of that – and probably even more. So the loss to them is very much smaller – against the cost of having to defend this action where on the small claims track they will not be entitled to recover costs.

Quite frankly, the potential loss to them is so small that it tells you something about their estimate of the value of their own reputation. These people are stupid and narrowminded.

If you do decide to take this to court then you will be invited to consider mediation. I can imagine that if it did go as far as mediation – but maybe before – there will be an offer to carry out the full service. I think this puts you in a difficult position because you have to decide whether you have confidence in them to carry the service out. I would feel happier about having it done by some independent authorised dealer – but this may not be an available option. You will need to discuss this if/when it comes to it

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t usually post this far because I have long held and definitive views on the Motor Industry. But Bankfodder, they are not stupid. They are also, probably, not narrow minded, they are business men and women. Calling one or many stupid is an unhelpful generalisation.


Edited by Hammy1962
  • Haha 1

42 years at the pointy end of the motor trade. :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hammy, I would like to consider myself as a businessman, I can assure you that I would not treat my customers in this way nor would I put my business reputation at risk by not dealing with a problem correctly when it arises.

I think it’s fair to say these people are salesmen and women and nothing more!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK so today I will post my Letter of claim and give 14 days to respond, can you advise if I send the same letter to the finance company or is it a different letter?

Up to now the finance company have tried mediation with Inchcape gradually offering more going through from the smallest figure so my guess is they will pay the service costs it just needs to be pushed there! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would address them both in the same letter. That makes it clear that they are both involved and they are complicit with each other. I also think that it will help to put pressure on the dealer because the finance company has got better things to do than muck around with this level of issue.

I think that before you start firing off letters, though, you need to figure out exactly what you are after. Is it just the money – or do you want the service done? If you have the service done then by who?

Frankly if I were you I would get the service done. Because this means that later on nobody can turn around and accuse you of having neglected the vehicle and therefore having forfeited any rights you might have under a warranty.

Now that you have caused trouble for the dealer – you want to keep yourself very squeakyclean so that any defects which occur in the future can be laid at their door and the door of the vehicle – and not attributed to your lack of compliance with the proper service regime

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, in that case if you post your letter of claim here then we can have a look.

Have you incurred any ancillary losses? If you have then you should claim those as well. At the very least, if you load up your claim initially then you have a fallback position if you feel that you are prepared to compromise on anything. If you give ground on is something, then that will give them a sense that they have managed to save some Face.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not received satisfactory resolution to my original email dated 25/01/2020 and subsequent emails regarding the faults on the vehicle which I bought from you on 24/01/2020.


Please see the summary of my requests from numerous emails once again,

Westover 4x4 £154.80 - Initial inspection fee to identify faults (Inchcape agree to pay)

Brake discs and pads £170.88 - The vehicle should not have been released to me with faulty brakes, due to Covid 19 lockdown and garages being closed I purchased the parts and changed the brakes myself to ensure the car was safe, vibration reported to Inchcape resolved.(Inchcape do not agree to pay as considered wear and tear)

Near side anti roll bar link worn quoted £165 Inchcape agreed to pay this (I have had the works complete for £76.35 included on Hypermotive bill attached)

Full service including timing belt change £845.69 (Quoted £1112.95) - Whilst I have been told by Gary at Inchcape that this service will not be reimbursed I would like to remind you that I paid for the extended warranty with Inchcape as attached and page 13 clearly states that vehicles with timing belts must be checked and changed in line with the manufacturers recommendations or warranty will not be covered. I therefore have to question why Inchcape sold me a vehicle and warranty knowing the timing belt was not changed and this would invalidate my warranty?

I am once again requesting a full refund of £1,247.72 on the grounds that the goods were not fit for purpose under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

I would like a reply as soon as possible so that I know you have received this letter. If you don't agree to the refund, could you please then send me a detailed response saying why you don't agree.

As you are aware, I have tried to resolve this with Toyota finance and yourselves and communication stopped from on your behalf.

If I do not receive a satisfactory response from you within 14 days of the date of this letter, I intend to issue proceedings against you in the county court without further notice. This may increase your liability for costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites



Dear Sir/Mdm

Letter of claim

Breach of contract and associated liability under the Consumer Credit Act

As you are fully aware on XXX date you sold me a vehicle registration number XXX. I also purchased a five year extended warranty.

This contract was financed by XXX finance company to whom also this letter has been addressed.
Also, as you are both fully aware, the vehicle exhibited certain defects shortly afterwards including problems with the brakes and worn rollbar link.
Despite the fact that the vehicle had reached XXX number of miles by the time I purchased it, it transpired that the service routine required by the manufacturers had not been implemented and so that the car had not received its full service at the appropriate time.
This was not explained to me at any point and I bought the car assuming that not only had it been properly prepared and inspected but also that the maintenance routine had been complied with.

It was also condition of the extended warranty which you sold me that the maintenance routine would be complied with at all times.

Clearly you have been in breach of the contract of sale - and of course under the consumer credit act, XXX finance company shares these contractual responsibilities with you

Although you have reimbursed me for some of the expenses I have incurred, there is still outstanding a further £XXX in respect of XXX and also £845 in respect of the required XXX mile service which I was obliged to arrange and pay for myself.

If you do not reimburse all of these expenses – £total within 14 days of this letter I shall begin a claim against both of you in the County Court to recover all of this sum plus interest plus the cost of my legal action and without any further notice.

Yours faithfully




I don't think you needed to include all the narrative

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't get in any more protracted correspondence. Send the letter of claim – and let them fuss about it if they want.

In fact I had forgotten that you are going to be sending it to both. I'm going to insert an amendment into my suggested letter

Link to post
Share on other sites


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...