Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Include they dont know you received it.    
    • You need to add in about being deferred every year to xx date, when you got no reply and that you have never earned above the threshold etc.    Should be in most erudio claimform threads here    Sorry I'm out till very late tonight herding sheep and can't search    Dx
    • Maybe the end of paragraph 1 doesn't apply to me as they have fulfilled my CPR request?
    • Thanks DX!     I have put together what I think is the standard defence in this situation, I hope its correct.   They haven't complied with my CCA request, Do I need to add something in my defence regarding this?       1.The Claimant claims £5999.52 for monies due from the Defendant   2. This debt was pursuant to a regulated agreement(s) between the Defendant and The Student Loans Company. Each agreement had an individual account number as follows:   3. The defendant failed to make payments as per the terms resulting in the agreement(s) being terminated. Notice of such is served by a Default or Termination Notice subject to the terms of the agreement(s).   4.The debt was assigned to the Claimant on 22/11/2013 with a notice provided to the Defendant. A new master reference number ***************** was also applied upon assignment.   The Claimant has complied with the Pre Action Protocol for Debt Claims   The Defendant contends that the Particulars of Claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. Paragraph 1 & 2 are noted the Defendant has in the past had financial dealings with the original creditor - The Student Loans Company. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or debt nor do I recognise the agreement numbers the claimant refers to .The Defendant has sought verification from the Claimant by way of a section 77 request which as to this date has failed to comply and remains in default.   2. Paragraph 3 & 4 are denied. I am not aware of any service of a Default Notice pursuant to section 87 of the consumer credit Act 1974 by the claimant nor the original creditor, nor of any legal assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 section 136 (1).   3. It is not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and   b) show how the Defendant’s alleged debt has reached the amount claimed for; and   c) show the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974; and   d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.     4. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant proves the allegation that the money is owed.     5. On the alternative, as the Claimant claims to be an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of section 136 of the Law of Property Act and section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.     6. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief
    • Starmer seems to have forgotten that far more Labour voters voted remain than voted leave perhaps he thinks they have nowhere else to go?   Perhaps they will literally go nowhere and stay at home Perhaps they will go to the libs. Seems more likely now than before as traditional allegiances have been widely broken in all areas.   Are the libs going to be kingmakers again?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Un-necessary work by Kwik Fit


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 157 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

Hello. I have an old banger but I have had it from new and although the car is 21 years old, it has only done 54,000 miles.


It started grinding when turning after I braked to take slow, tight turns, also a knocking at the back. I assumed it was brakes and couldn’t get in anywhere.


took the risk of using Kwik Fit. They assured me the brakes were at fault and I needed new everything, plus 2 new rear tyres, cost £850. I said no way, they knocked 10% off and talked me into it by saying it needed to be done etc.


I fetched the car the following day and drove out the EXACT same car with the EXACT same grinding and knocking. Brakes are no different. I checked my MOT from the end of November, it said the brake discs on the front were pitted but not seriously weakened. Nothing for rear brakes or tyres mentioned.


I have a meeting on Monday with the area manager to sort this out and in the meantime have sorted out the grinding by topping up my very low power steering fluid.


I feel that the tyres were not necessary, they said they were replaced as they were 5 years old, and the brakes were not the problem, they did not fix the problems it came in with 


I am asking for a refund.


Any advice and opinions would be greatly appreciated . 

Edited by dx100uk
Link to post
Share on other sites

Re the tyres, tyres up to 5 years of age can still be sold and regarded as new. Just checked Kwik Fit website and this is confirmed by themselves. So they're talking nonsense.


However, you only really get to have a good look at your tyres once the car is up on the ramp. One time I had to replace 3 tyres in one go at MOT as there were nails and screws in the tyres in areas that couldn't be salvaged, and the fitters showed me, yet I never knew by just visual checking them and driving. But then this is not the reason Kwik Fit gave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, funnily enough I have taken a screenshot of their own advice to take with me! They said to me that they always recommend changing tyres over 5 years old, mine were 2016 but I only do 3,000 miles a year on average. Nothing mentioned on my MOT 6 weeks ago that’s what got me thinking, I had to check it when I got home.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Andyorch changed the title to Un-necessary work by Kwik Fit

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...