Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you both. My defence was as vague as their Claim. 1. I am the defendant in this claim and litigant in person. All allegations made by the claimant are denied. 2. The defendant does not recognise the alleged agreement xxxxxxxxxxx as mentioned in the particulars of claim therefore it is denied that any such agreement exists. 3. The defendant has requested copies of the alleged agreement under Data Subject Access Request, Consumer Credit act 1974 s.77/8 and Civil Procedure Rules 31.4 but to date the claimant has failed to provide a copy of this document. 4.The defendant has also requested copies of the default and termination notice for the alleged account xxxxxxxxx as required to legally enforce the alleged debt, but again the claimant has failed to provide either. 5. In addition the defendant has requested copies of statements for the alleged account xxxxxxx showing the amount of monies allegedly owed to the claimant. To Date these have not been provided. 6. The defendants view is that this claim is vexatious and an abuse of process as the claimant has failed to provide any documentation to support their claim and respectfully requests that the said claim be struck out.   As an aside, I noticed that the 'statement' they did provide had a different figure on it to what they are claiming, so I will hopefully be able to flesh out quite a bit in my skeleton argument.   Spam 
    • 80% refund sounds like a very good deal* as they are entitled by law to deduct an amount from the refund to reflect the use you have had of the item over the 12 months it has been working.   So you could argue that a deduction of 20% for one year indicates that they expect it to last for at least five years, and probably longer.     * Think about it this way - would you pay 80% of the value of a brand new iPad to buy a second-hand one that somebody else has been using for over a year, or would you expect to get it cheaper than that?
    • Hi WoodDD.. Neither Case was cited in the VSC WS... however, MR D form VCS threw in VCS v Ward & Idle for the Judge to consider during the hearing. The Judge did not have time to review this. I believe he may have had a quick scan but decided it wasn't relevant at the time.. By not relevant, he didn't elaborate if it was not admissible or anything else..   Hope this helps..   Regards Tom     
    • Can I  ask what you mean by "... they recommended a firm... "?   I ask because I'm a bit surprised that Social Services are even allowed to do that.  (I may be mistaken and that this is common practice, but it seems a bit odd to me).   If they did do so and the work has turned out to be sub-standard and unsatisfactory, I would have no hesitation in making a formal complaint to the council and also to my (or your friend's) local councillor(s).  You acted on the council's recommendation and you should have a reasonable expectation that the firm recommended should be reliable and professional.  I would also insist that trading standards be asked to investigate this firm.  (Where I live our local county council trading standards department runs an approved trader database).   A complaint to the council might not directly assist you but it might help to prevent others being taken in by this firm.
    • Hello Susan, welcome to CAG.   Hopefully Paul Walton will see this message and reply to you, but it would also be a good idea to start a new thread of your own so we can advise on anything else connected with your refund.   Best, HB
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

A shade Greener boilers refuse to mend boiler


Recommended Posts

I have had an ASG (A Shade Greener) boiler fitted for the last ten years .

 

Recently the boiler started leaking.

 before I called their engineer ~I had the system power flushed as had been requested by ASG.

 

The engineer stayed for about 10 minutes and stated that the flush had damaged the boiler.

 

However both the flush engineer and an independent Gas engineer that I consulted have stated that the flush could not have the damage.

 

ASG refuse to engage  with me.

 

Because I have three vulnerable adults in the property and no heat or hot water  i have to borrow money to get the boiler replaced.

Do I have any recourse?

Link to post
Share on other sites

ASG are a terrible company regardless, but no i don't think you have any recourse toward them no unless yo can prove fault with the boiler  which is now 10yrs ols and well outside any guarantee i expect, even with the manufacturer?

 

has the boiler been regularly serviced etc etc, looks like your contacted ASG after it started leaking and they advised a power flush for a leak?

then  an eng said that was what has caused it?

 

can you clarify your story please

 

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

The boiler had started losing pressure.

I was getting concerned about it.

ASG sent me a letter saying that to keep the warranty valid I needed to power flush. 

 

On the morning of the power flush the boiler failed completely and I turned it off. 

The flush technician decided not to flush through the boiler as he was unable to get it to work and reported it as leaking. 

I then got ASG to come out the next day.

ASG refused to mend the boiler stating that the power flush had damaged it. 

 

I have spoken to the flush technician who has explained he did not flush hot.

He has done power flushes for many years and has never seen the damage alleged caused by a power flush. 

 

An independent gas safe engineer has also stated that the damage could not be caused by a power flush. 

The boiler was maintained annually by ASG according to the contract.

It includes a fifteen year maintenance contract. 

 

I was going to sar them and try going either via the FSA or possibly court. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

right that makes more sense now.

 

but lets be clear here...there is an existing warranty?....

and you are not confusing this with a 'service contract' , which they signed you up to, ?

 

it appears ASG are doing their usual crap then by claiming the failing boiler , of which they were aware of an issue by letter, was caused by a power flush.

 

 

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

The boiler had started losing pressure.

I was getting concerned about it.

 

ASG sent me  a letter saying that to keep the warranty valid I needed to power flush. 

 

On the morning of the power flush the boiler failed completely and I turned it off. 

 

The flush technician decided not to flush through the boiler as he was unable to get it to work and reported it as leaking. 

 

I then got ASG to come out the next day. ASG refused to 

 

I had the power flush done before calling ASG.i

 

The technician doing the power flush could not get the boiler to fire up. He took the front off the boiler and noticed that there was water in the boiler and a leak. This was included on his report.

 

Despite this they are claiming the damage was caused by the flush

. I have forwarded the letter to the technician and he has agreed to make a formal report. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...