Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • PAPLOC = Pre Action Protocol Letter Of Claim. Heres a handy guide to sme of the acronyms you'll see on the forum... https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/147286-posting-in-this-forum-and-a-z-of-motoring-terms/#comment-4399743  
    • Thames Water is lobbying for higher bills and lower fines to avoid bailout   Thames Water is lobbying for higher bills and lower fines to avoid bailout, report claims – business live | Business | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Britain’s largest water company is trying to avoid a potential multibillion-pound taxpayer bailout   despite giving out large dividends to shareholders and large bonuses to senior management UK water company dividends jump to £1.4bn despite criticism over sewage outflows WWW.FT.COM Payments include internal transfers between complex web of holding companies   In charts: how privatisation drained Thames Water’s coffers | Utilities | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Decades of underinvestment and bumper dividends have left the firm debt-laden and under investigation   ‘The whole thing stinks’: water firms to pay £15bn to shareholders as customers foot sewage bill | Water bills | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM With cost of cleanup to be passed on to bill payers, analysis shows they will also pay £624 more by 2030 to fund investor payouts    
    • Are you still claiming Tax Credits / Universal Credit? They will likely take a small monthly amount off , if you are
    • So much for protecting our borders - Guv all just dog whistles   Office for the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration to have budget slashed - Neal The Office for the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration will have its budget cut by five per cent year on year, David Neal has revealed, Holly Bancroft reports. Mr Neal is giving evidence to the Home Affairs Committee in a one-off session on immigration after being sacked by James Cleverly. The home secretary said Mr Neal had “breached the terms of appointment and lost the confidence of the home secretary” after Mr Neal warned of “dangerous” failings by border force that he claimed were allowing “high-risk” aircraft to land in Britain without security checks. The Home Office had “categorically rejected” the claims, saying that Mr Neal “has chosen to put misleading data into the public domain”. You can read more here: Home Office sacks immigration chief after criticism of border security
    • "In an explosive revelation, Mr Staunton also alleged that the current Post Office CEO threatened to resign over a HR investigation into his own conduct. Mr Staunton said Post Office chief executive Nick Read had fallen out with the HR director “and she produced a document that was 80 pages in length” and there was just one paragraph in there about his own conduct and use of “politically incorrect comments”. Mr Staunton said Mr Read was “really quite upset” and threatened to resign a number of times. But just an hour before Mr Staunton’s testimony, Mr Read had denied - under oath - that he had ever having tried to resign."   I’m victim of smear campaign says sacked Post Office chair as he accuses CEO of lying WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK Henry Staunton, sacked by business secretary Kemi Badenoch, gives evidence to Commons committee     see also from the post above "Carl Creswell, an official from the Department for Business and Trade said Tidswell had told Ben Tidswell that some board members might resign if Henry Staunton were not sacked)" Tidswell says he was right (See 11.14am.)"   So baden-ouch seems to be at the very least twisting the truth - no surprise there    
  • 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
      • 160 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

eBay buyer issues

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 422 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



Just after some advice.


I sold an item on eBay in November and, after a couple of weeks or so, the item still hadn’t arrived, the buyer opened a request with eBay. The buyer ended up receiving a refund and the case was closed. However, shortly after, the item was delivered to the buyer.  I also have proof from the tracking details that the buyer has received and signed for the item.


I contacted eBay about this and they told me to contact the buyer and ask them to either send the item back or to send me a payment for what the item originally sold for. The buyer has not responded to my email and eBay have said that, once a case is closed, there is nothing that they themselves can do for me to receive my money back. 


Is there any legal action I can take regarding this matter as I do have proof that the buyer was refunded and later did receive the item? 


Kind regards 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes there is a legal action. You can sue them for the money which they owe you.

From what you say I gather that you know the name and address of the purchaser.

Can you tell us what the item was and how much money has been reimbursed to them?

Link to post
Share on other sites


No point in hanging around. Read up on this forum about the steps involved taking a small claim in the County Court.

Draft letter of claim and post it here.
Once we have checked it and it seems okay then you should send it off and click off the claim 15 days later as promised in your letter of claim.

Once you have sent the letter of claim then register with the County Court MoneyClaim website and begin your claim there. Post up a draft of any particulars of claim here before you issue the claim.

If you send the letter of claim then be absolutely certain that you aren't bluffing and that you will click the claim of as promised in your letter of claim.

If you aren't certain then don't do it – but then probably better give up

You can also inform them in your letter of claim that once you receive your judgement, that their full name and address and also their eBay ID will be posted up on this forum and elsewhere on the Internet together with a copy of the judgement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, can you advise if this Letter of Claim is acceptable to send thanks: 



Letter of Claim 


Dear ********* *****


I am writing to you in regards to an item you purchased from me via eBay on 25/11/2022 for the sum of £299 which was an Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max mobile phone [item number 314220961744]. 


You opened a request with eBay 08/12/2022 as the item had still not been delivered at that point and on 12/12/2022 you were issued a full refund by eBay and the case was closed. 


On the 21/12/2022 the item was delivered to your address and I have proof of this from the tracking details that I entered on to the Royal Website which shows that the item has been delivered and signed for. 


I contacted eBay regarding this matter and they told me that I should contact you and ask you to either return the item to me, or, if you wanted to keep the item, to send me a payment for the sum of £299 - the amount that the phone was originally sold to you for and the amount that was billed to my account when you were refunded by eBay. 


I then contacted you and asked you to send the item back or to send a payment to me for the amount of £299 but you did not respond to my email and have refused to resolve this situation.


This Letter of Claim is to inform you that you have 14 days to either return the item to the address listed above, or, if you wanted to keep the item, you will need to send a payment of £299 to my PayPal account which is:




If this situation is not resolved within the 14 days then I will be escalating the matter to the County Court. Once the matter is escalated to the County Court, you will not only be liable to pay for the cost of the phone, but also any court fees which may be incurred plus interest charges. I have all your details to hand and the evidence that the phone was delivered to you which will be passed on to the County Court. 


Yours sincerely,


**** ******** 



Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fine. Send it.

Just to warn you that if this person is a vindictive person, you may not get the phone back in the condition in which it was sent. I hope you have evidence of its condition because if not you might then have a very complicated problem on your hands

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thing you could do would be to consult the land registry web search website.


For £3, you can check the address and see whether the person happens to be the owner of the property .

If they are, then that gives you an additional leverage



Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, keep us updated step by step. We can help you work this out .

Think that a land registry check for 3 quid would be a sensible set and would represent good value, especially if you found that they were the owners of the property





Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...