Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • more detest the insurrectional ex variety dx
    • Laura, I was surprised that the Director said that you hadn't appealed twice. I thought that the letter you posted on 24th June was the second appeal and that was to the IAS. And they did say that there was no further appeal possible. Could you please explain how many times you appealed. I am going to read your WS now. PS  Yes I meant to say that the keeper did not have a licence therefore it was wrong of them to assume he was the driver and the keeper. Thanks for picking that up.
    • In answer to your questions yes even though it wasn't called that, it was the NTK. Had it been a windscreen ticket you would not have received the NTK until 28 days had elapsed. In earlier times if the warden was present then a windscreen ticket would have been issued. It nows seems that the DVLA and the Courts don't see a problem  with not issuing a ticket when a warden is on site. A period of parking must mean that ther e has to be a start time and a finish time in order for it to be considered a period. A single time does not constitute a period. I am not sure what you mean by saying it could be taken either way.  All they have mentioned is  the incident time which is insufficient. There are times on the photos about one minute apart which do not qualify as the parking period because they are not on the PCN itself. The reason I asked if the were any more photos is that you should be allowed 5 minutes Consideration period for you to read the signs and decide whether you want to accept them and you do that by staying longer than 5 minutes. if  more  do not have photos of your staying there for more than 5 minutes they are stuffed. You cannot say that you left within the 5 minute period if you didn't , but you can ask them, should it get to Court , to provide strict proof that you stayed longer than the statutory time. If they can't do that, case over.
    • I recently bought some trainers from Sports Direct and was unhappy with them and their extortionate delivery and return postage charges. I tweeted about being unhappy, and received a reply from someone claiming to be from Sports Direct asking me to send my order number and email address by pm, so a claim could be raised. Which I (stupidly) did. The account used Sports Direct's name and branding, and a blue tick.  The following day I received a call from "Sports Direct Customer Service", and with a Kenyan number. They asked for details of the issue, and then sent me an email with a request to install an app called Remitly. They provided me with a password to access the app then I saw that it had been setup for me to transfer £100, and I was asked to enter my credit card number so they could "refund" me. I told them I was uncomfortable with this (to say the least), and was just told to ring them back when I did feel comfortable doing it. Ain't never gonna happen.  I just checked my X account, and the account that sent the message asking for my details is gone. I feel like a complete idiot falling for what was a clear scam. But at least I realised before any real damage was done. if you make a complaint about a company on social media, and you get a reply from someone claiming to be from that company and asking for personal details, tread very carefully.   
    • The good news is that their PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012  Schedule 4.. First under Section 9 (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; (b)inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full; The PCN does not specify the parking period. AS you rightly say the ANPR times do not include driving to the parking space and then from there back to the exit. And once you include getting children in and out of cars especially if seat belts are involved the time spent parked can be a fair bit less than the ANPR times but still probably nowhere near the time you spent. But that doesn't matter -it's the fact that they failed to comply. Also they failed to ask the keeper to pay the charge.  Their failure means that they cannot now transfer the charge from the diver to the keeper . Only the driver is now liable. As long as UKPA do not know who was driving it will be difficult for them to win in Court as the Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. Particularly as anyone can drive any car if they have the correct insurance. It might be able to get more reasons to contest the PCN if you could get some photos of the signs. both at the entrance and inside the car park. the photos need to be legible and if there are signs that say different things from others that would also be a help.
  • 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

Had to cancel car hire as unable to fly due to covid…


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 566 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

Hi all. Thanks so much to all those on here who contribute to help us all. It is very humbling to read through and much appreciated.

 

Apologies if this is the wrong forum for this post, but I couldn’t find a car hire or travel forum, and I think as I’m new my posting abilities may be restricted? Feel free to move it if it belongs somewhere more suitable.

 

Thus far I have been unable to recover any money from AE Europe/Autoerope car hire. This is the full story:

On 29 October 2020, I booked and paid Auto Europe for car hire to commence on 1 November 2020 at 20:30 hours, with pickup at Las Vegas International Airport. I paid £742.87.

 

On 1 November 2020 at Heathrow Airport I was told by a United States Government Official that I would not be able to take my flight to Las Vegas. Despite being a Visa holder and meeting the criteria for travel outlined by the latest US Government Proclamation, the constantly changing severity of the Covid19 pandemic meant that on that day only US Citizens and US Embassy granted special cases were being allowed to travel to the USA. I was told by the Official that this was the very latest situation and it was changing constantly, hence his presence at the check-in desk. I explained that there was no foresight of this and he apologised but explained that the US Government could impose whatever restrictions they see fit at any time without notice and he was acting on the very latest orders.

 

This all occurred at the check-in desk in front of the airline staff who certainly felt sorry for me and also refunded my flight.

 

I telephoned Auto Europe to cancel the car hire but was told I would not be refunded as it was less than 48 hours before the scheduled pickup. 

 

I also tried to telephone the hire desk (Dollar) directly at Las Vegas airport using the number provided on my booking but there was no answer, despite the opening hours being all day. I tried again several times, trying further at different periods, but each time it just rang off with no answer. I tried 20 times in total. Same result each time.

 

The Terms & Conditions on the pdf file received from AE on 29 October 2020 states:

 

“In case of a cancellation due to officially acknowledged Force Majeure Auto Europe will charge an administration fee of GBP 25 only.”

 

Therefore I believe I am entitled to a refund of at least £717.87 (which is the £742.87 I paid minus their £25 administration fee). 
 

I have done some research and the High Court has ruled that Covid19 is indeed a Force Majeure in case of any doubt.

 

Thus far AE have said I’m entitled to NOTHING due to the less than 48 hour notice point. They said that that they had already paid Dollar for the rental before I phoned them on 29 October 2020.

 

I’m thinking of a small claim but am very new to all this, I believe I have 2 years to initiate it so if I have to go down that route I am looking to send a letter before claim in the next week or so.

 

Thank you for reading and any advice, suggestions etc would be hugely appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you post up the t&c pdf that AE sent you. Cover up anything that would identify you (name, reference numbers, etc).

 

 

 

 

 

Is this the High Court case about force majeure that you referred to? If so one point to note is that the contract in that case contained a definition of force majeure and the definition included "epidemic". The High Court ruled that Covid was an epidemic and therefore force majeure under that specific contract..  I'm not a lawyer and I don't know whether AE could argue that Covid wasn't a force majeure under their t&c.

 

https://www.rpc.co.uk/snapshots/commercial-cases/spring-2022/high-court-finds-covid19-pandemic-amounts-to-a-force-majeure-event/

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Uchaida  -  assuming the contract is subject to UK law, you have 6 years (England and Wales) or 5 years (Scotland) in which to sue.

 

We need to see the T&Cs of the contract (1) to confirm in what circumstances you could cancel it and (2) to determine what law governs it.

 

Also, how did you pay?  If by credit card you may have a s75 claim against your card provider.  If by debit card you will be well out of time for a charge back.  If by bank transfer your only recourse is against AutoEurope.

 

Have you checked that your travel insurance definitely didn't cover this?  (I can't remember how covid affected claims back in 2020)

 

Just to add to my previous post - assuming the contract is governed by UK law, it is possible that the legal doctrine of frustration applies.

 

See this link from the Competitions and Markets Authority (A UK government agency) which gave guidance as to how contracts that can't be carried out because of Covid should be handled:  Statement on coronavirus (COVID-19), consumer contracts, cancellation and refunds - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

 

In particular, note the bits below that I've emphasised in bold itelics:

 

Contracts that cannot go ahead due to lockdown laws

In some circumstances, due to lockdown laws, a contract cannot go ahead as agreed or at all, and is therefore ‘frustrated’. A contract will be frustrated as a matter of law if, due to no fault of the parties, something happens after the contract was entered into which means it can no longer be performed at all or performance would be radically different to what was agreed.

As a result, the contract comes to an end and, where consumers have paid money in advance for services or goods that they have yet to receive, they will generally be entitled to obtain a refund.

They will also not be required to make further payments.

In particular, for most consumer contracts, the CMA would expect a consumer to be offered a full refund where:

  • a business has cancelled a contract without providing any of the promised goods or services
  • no goods or services are provided by a business because this is prevented by the lockdown laws
  • a consumer is prevented from receiving any goods or services, because, for example, lockdown laws in the UK or abroad have made it illegal to receive or use the goods or services

In most cases, consumers will contact a business to ask for their money back, but there is no requirement for consumers formally to communicate with a business before becoming entitled to a refund.

Examples of legal restrictions in lockdown laws include:

  • restrictions imposed under the original lockdown laws in the early stages of the pandemic
  • restrictions imposed by local lockdown laws
  • specific restrictions imposed by local authorities under their legal lockdown powers
  • mandatory self-isolation following a direction from a public health officer
  • mandatory self-isolation when returning to the UK from certain countries which may affect the consumer’s ability to use a service during the self-isolation period (provided that the requirement to self-isolate was imposed after the consumer had entered into the relevant contract and was not reasonably anticipated by the consumer)

If laws in another country prevent a business from providing a service under a contract with a UK consumer or prevent that consumer from receiving the service, then in most cases consumers will also be entitled to a refund.

Businesses should not require consumers to take unreasonable or unnecessary steps in order to obtain refunds. A business imposing such barriers may breach consumer protection law by doing so."

 

 

And to add further (I can't edit earlier posts as time-expired):

 

1.  It doesn't matter what the cancellation terms were and whether or not you complied with them.  Your argument with AutoEurope is that the car hire contract was frustrated by the actions of the US government and their representative in preventing you from travelling.  (Quote to them the CMA guidance I linked to above.)

 

2.  It's also irrelevant to you as a consumer whether or not AutoEurope had already paid Dollar or whoever the car provider in the states was.  That's a commercial or business matter for them to resolve between themselves.  It doesn't affect your right to a full refund.

 

That's certainly the approach I would take with AutoEurope - assuming this contract is subject to UK law.

 

See what they say when you point the above out to them...

Edited by Manxman in exile
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ethel and Manxman - thank you so much!

 

I have attached the pdf/T&Cs to this post.

 

Ethel - yes that’s the case I found.

 

Manxman - I’m fairly sure I paid with Mastercard, I will check my records and look into the s75 claim you mention, thank you! I didn’t have any travel insurance.

 

Thank you very much, yes I think those points in bold apply. British Airways were very understanding and refunded with no problems but AE seem to want to play hardball.

 

 Thanks again :)

 

 

AE TCs .pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

The t&c don't show the exact name of the Auto Europe company you contracted with, it may be redacted. However, you mentioned they were in Newcastle so I assume it's the company shown at the bottom of the 'General Business Terms' on their website Read all about the Auto Europe General Business Terms  - AE Europe Ltd

 

Address
AE Europe Limited
4A Kestrel Court
Hapton, Burnley
Lancashire
BB11 5NA

Registered
AE Europe Limited
Registered Number: 04964813
First Floor, 2 Collingwood Street
Newcastle Upon Tyne
United Kingdom NE1 1JF

 

 

Auto Europe LLC is the USA parent company. The Newcastle address looks like it might be just a brass plate at a business services office, not an AE operating location, so if sending formal letters for legal action there I'd cc to the Burnley address.

 

So as the contract is between a UK company and you, a UK resident, and was concluded in England it will be subject to English law. 

 

Did you make the booking through the website?

 

The first line of the General Business Terms usefully confirms that AE are acting as agent for the car hire companies, not for you: "AE Europe Limited, 4A Kestrel Court, Hapton, Burnley, Lancashire BB11 5NA UK, acts as a direct agent for car rental companies worldwide on behalf of Auto Europe LLC ." This confims Manxman's point that the arrangement AE have with Dollar are nothing to do with you and irrelevant to AE's obligation to refund you.

 

Also the General Business Terms on their website make no mention of force majeure. The 'Cancellations' paragraph is the same as the one on the t&c you posted here but without the sentence about force majeure. So IMV it's arguable whether the force majeure in the t&cs even applies because it was not in their terms of business that were available to you before you entered into the contract. But I think this may be to your advantage.

 

You can argue that both on the force majeure wording in the contract confirmation they sent you and on the contract frustration grounds Manxman has outlined you are entitled to your money back. And if they refuse start a small claims court MCOL action to recover it. I'm assuming you have the written evidence of why you were denied boarding that you'd need to put before a judge in court.

 

Do some research to understand the difference between force majeure and contract frustration before you write to them. Essentially force majeure applies if it's a clause within the contract, and contract frustration applies if the contract says nothing about force majeure. In this case you can argue both. They should refund under force majeure in the t&cs they sent you, or if they want a long legal argument about that proceed with contract frustration.

 

And explore the s75 claim route.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ethel - thank you very much again.

 

Yes I booked online. The following  address details were displayed in the email that contained the pdf I attached previously:

 

Address
AE Europe Limited
Office 2
4B Kestrel Court 
Burnley BB11 5NA
Lancashire UK..

Registered
AE Europe Limited
Registered Number: 04964813
First Floor, 2 Collingwood Street
Newcastle Upon Tyne
United Kingdom NE1 1JF
Directors: Imad Khalidi, Niall McDevitt, Nathalie Houder, Jonathan Benoit, Heather Gamage


As for written proof from the US Government official, he didn’t give me anything at all, just the verbal information/explanation/apology and the email address for the US embassy to contact them to see if I could obtain “special case” status, which subsequently I was unable to get.
 

Immediately after the US official gave the denial, BA accepted what had happened and offered to change/refund the flight. I don’t know what I can produce (if anything?!) in terms of written evidence. I had of course physically turned up at Heathrow, wanting to travel, so it obviously isn’t a case of me being late or changing my mind or anything of choice, but I’m unsure how I can show this in written evidence.
 

I have been reading up on the s75 route and - unless I’m missing something - it looks like there is a time limit of 120 days from the date of the service commencement or from noticing a problem. I have missed that time scale by a long way unfortunately (my own fault of course :().


Thanks again for all your help :)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The important question is whether it was a credit card or a debit card.  Credit card = good; debit card = not good.

 

My first course of action would be to argue the case with AutoEurope, the people you actually paid and who presumably your contract was with.  But I'd agree with @Ethel Street that it's important you deal with the appropriate AutoEurope entity.

 

Only if you get nowhere arguing with AutoEurope would I raise a s75 claim with your card provider.  (And you only have that option if you paid by credit card, not debit card).  If you do reach the point of raising a s75 claim, make sure that your card provider understands that it is a s75 claim you are raising, and NOT a chargeback.

 

I'd suggest that only if you get nowhere with AutoEurope and either (i) you paid by debit card, or (ii) you paid by credit card but your card provider rejects your s75 claim, should you consider making a court claim against AutoEurope.  However, note that if your card provider has already rejected your s75 claim, it might be an indication that they don't think you have the law on your side...   

 

If you do end up making a court claim, you will have to ensure that you issue the claim aginst the correct AutoEurope incarnation - ie the one you paid and contracted with.

 

NB - an important note on s75 claims.  I'm pretty sure that UK courts have enforced s75 claims against card providers even where the purchase has been abroad or overseas.  (ie where the purchase was not subject to UK law)

 

If you end up having to issue a court claim against AutoEurope in circumstances where your bank has already rejected a s75 claim - but which you think they should have paid out on - I suppose you could also include your card provider as a second defendant on the claim.

 

The law says that where you have a breach of contract claim against a supplier, you "... shall have a like claim against [your card provider], who, with the supplier, shall accordingly be jointly and severally liable to [you]".

 

See s75 Consumer Credit Act 1974.  Consumer Credit Act 1974 (legislation.gov.uk)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi @Manxman in exile - Thank you again! I have found the transaction and yes it was my Tesco Mastercard Credit card, but as I understand it, I can’t make a s75 claim as it’s passed 120 days? Or am I wrong there?

 

Your advice makes perfect sense. I will reopen negotiations with AE first until they give me an absolute final answer.

 

@Manxman in exile & @Ethel Street- I’ve found the transaction on my credit card statement and the money was indeed paid to AE Europe Ltd, Newcastle.

 

Thank you both so much for your help.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 29/09/2022 at 11:27, Uchaida said:

Hi @Manxman in exile - Thank you again! I have found the transaction and yes it was my Tesco Mastercard Credit card, but as I understand it, I can’t make a s75 claim as it’s passed 120 days? Or am I wrong there?...

 

 

 

You are wrong.

 

120 days applies only to Chargebacks, which are governed by internal rules set by the debit and credit card providers themselves - Visa and Mastercard.

 

s75 claims are entirely different and are governed by statute in England and Wales, and apply to credit cards , not debit cards.  There is no time limit beyond the normal statute of limitations of 6 years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

just for the correct record... chargeback is a total of 540 days, it's 120 days from when you realise you can ASK for a chargeback.

 

 

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...