Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Funnily enough the ad is still available online Range Rover 4.4 SDV8 Autobiography LWB Previously Sold | Clinkard Performance Cars WWW.CLINKARDCARS.CO.UK Performance, Prestigious and Specialist cars Dealers in Romsey, Hampshire but the autotrader version isn't which was probably slightly different potentially with more information. Reported to FOS over the phone but essentially gave them the same information I've stated here, updating them that I'm paying for a car I haven't had for nearly a month now etc I'll certainly come back with an update. Fingers crossed they will realise it's not worth taking to court. So the inspection among other things found a hairline crack across a load bearing section of the chasis which at the minute to the naked eye looks tiny but could turn out to be catastrophic and has had some filler chucked on top of it but we'll see what Clinkards inspection comes back with. Distance wise I believe they're around 165-170 miles away from me. Also I'm sure many people will have PCP agreements as it's the most common way to buy cars under 5 years old but they just forgotten the terminology or name for it. Pay deposit, choose a length then pay the difference between value today and guaranteed future value at the end of that agreed term   Whole experience has scarred me and moving forward I'd be tempted to pay for a pre purchase inspection myself because these guys are bigggg traders with a lot of top end cars. I just hope they don't make any more silly offers
    • Strange final response. They say that they are still investigating but they are giving you their final response anyway. Seems like a load of nonsense. Have you got a copy of what you then sent to the ombudsman? Anyway, for the moment although would like to know – it really is all for curiosity because as you have put it into the hands of the ombudsman it's probably not worth doing anything more until you have a reply. I would suggest that when you decide to spend this kind of money in future on a used car, that you understand exactly what your rights are before you make the purchase. When you buy anything – and maybe especially used car you should realise that you aren't only paying for the car, you are also paying for a bundle of consumer obligations which are intended to bind the dealer. You are paying for a vehicle which is of satisfactory quality and remains that way for a reasonable period of time and you are paying for any defects which emerge to be addressed and repaired at the expense of the dealer. We've already pointed out that by purchasing the warranty, they have effectively persuaded you to pay for something for which you have already paid. Very decent of you not to want to cause trouble in respect of defects which manifested themselves within the first few weeks. I have no idea why. For £78,000…. This you say that they were age-related problems – that is still no reason why those defects should have been there or why the dealer should not have been responsible for them. It seems to me that you have a clear case against the dealer/the finance company. We don't have many or any PCP purchases on this forum. However, it seems to me that the finance company is probably responsible for the condition of the vehicle because effectively you have bought it from them and to that extent it should be the same as HP. With a hire purchase agreement, it is as if you bought the vehicle directly from the finance company not from the dealer and it is the finance company which bears all the consumer obligations. I think the only thing you can do is to monitor the situation. Update us when you hear from the financial ombudsman and if you need to take the matter to court then we will help you. In principle it should be straightforward – but certainly there is a risk of a serious bill for costs if you lose. I don't see you losing. Did you say somewhere that the report suggested that the vehicle was unroadworthy? Have you got the advertisement for the vehicle? Does it make claims for the vehicle which are clearly untrue? And by the way, four hours away from you is what kind of distance? Have you read our used car guide? Have you looked at the video?
    • there's one in this thread.. i wonder if its the same, they seem to be identical regardless each time we have a thread with one Vehicle Control Services Privacy Notice, Brooke Retail Car Park, HA4 0LN - Private Land Parking Enforcement - Consumer Action Group  
    • It was really this daft Privacy Notice we were after, but no worries, I'm 99% sure it doesn't count as a NTD otherwise in his letter Simple Simon wouldn't have offered the discount of paying £60 instead of £100. Apologies for jumping the gun earlier. It's a pity your friend paid.  It's neither here nor there if Excel would back down or not.  They are not some statutory authority.  They're just a cowboy private company.  The only way she could have been forced to pay is if a judge had ruled against her in a court hearing, which is highly unlikely given she could have proved to have been elsewhere. I see her "offence" was in May 2023 so logically Excel and their signs were there by then.
  • 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

University have instructed DCA to recover fees for a full semester when I attended for 2 weeks!


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1049 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 enrolled in a course in 2017, which I began on or around 18th September 2017. Within 2 weeks I suffered a few personal issues and took an interruption to studies on October 11th, meaning I attended the university for around 3 weeks, if that.

 

I recently received a letter from a DCA saying that they intend to recover the monies for a full semester on behalf of the university.

 

Am I right in thinking that this is completely unreasonable? I attended for less than 15% of the semester before taking an interruption to studies and eventually withdrawing without returning.

 

I am aware that due to me attending I will owe some money, and I am happy to pay that on a pro-rata basis, meaning I'd pay £495 (15%) instead of the full £3300.

 

Is this a reasonable approach? I am unwilling to pay the full semester fee as that is completely unreasonable. Does any one have any experience with this? Should I contact the university, or deal with the DCA?

Link to post
Share on other sites

you ignore the dca they are not bailiffs and have zero legal powers on any debt no matter what it's type.

 

did you inform the uni in writing you were latterly fully withdrawing due to personal issues?

 

name names too 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 DCA is STA International & University is Birmingham

 

I did inform them, and I have confirmation via email confirming my withdrawal from studies on the 11th October.

 

When I didn't return to studies I was permanently withdrawn, I have email confirmation of this, however they have written my withdrawal date as 1st of November for some reason...

Edited by jimjarn
Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you take out any student finance for the course fees ?

 

if so, what did the University receive from student finance ?

 

What were the terms and conditions related to the course you signed up to ?   There should be a section related to liabiliity for course fees, where you withdraw from studies early.

 

If you don't have a copy of the terms and conditions for the course you partly attended, you could ask the University for a copy.

 

As stated, you should only contact the University about this matter.  If you suffered from a health issue or other serious issue, the University may have discretion to negotiate the amount of debt.

 

 

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 OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add, if the University actually acquiesced and withdrew you from the course on 1 November, then it could be said that they have accepted your breach of contract.

An attempt to levy an entire semester of fees in the face of a breach of contract could amount to an extortionate penalty. In principle they should only be entitled to recover their administrative losses and they would have to account for these.

I would suggest that you raise this point at the moment – but let's see how heavy it all gets.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@unclebulgaria67 This was a self-funded postgrad degree, according to the terms and conditions I am liable for 25% (£2475) of the fees.

 

@BankFodder Sorry I didn't clarify the years of my interruption to studies. I was granted an interruption in October 2017 until October 2018, then granted another year extension of interruption to the following academic year, bringing my total interruption to 2 years.

 

In their terms and conditions this is only offered in the most exceptional of circumstances. I was unable to return in 2019, and was permanently withdrawn on Nov 1st 2019.

 

I am not too sure how to implement what you've said into my complaint, but how exactly did they breach their contract in your opinion? Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You misunderstand me. It is your breach which can only be addressed by recovery of administrative losses. Not their breach.

However, I'm fully aware that I jumped into this discussion without really knowing everything.

All I'm saying is that if a breach of contract by you could be identified – particularly in fact that the contract was then terminated by them, they would only be able to recover administrative losses.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

you can most certainly totally ignore STA just a bunch of powerless fleecers..

 

read this and suitably understand what to do

 

Uni Chasing Money- Debt collection STA international - Page 2 - Students - Consumer Action Group

 

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

:rockon:

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...