Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • Farage rails and whines about not being allowed on the BBC ... ... but pulls out at the last minute of a BBC Panorama interview special. It was denied it was anything to do with his candidates being outed as misogynists and Putin apologists, or that farage was afraid Nick Robinson might throw some difficult questions at him ... despite farages recent practice at quickly cowering in fear.   It was claimed 'it wasn't in Nigels diary'     Nigel Farage pulls out of BBC interview at last minute amid Hitler row WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK ‘Panorama’ special postponed as Reform UK party faces row over candidate who claimed UK would have been ‘better off’ if it had...   Waaahhhh
    • i'd say put lowells to strict proof of where the payment came from. cant hurt to send SB letter, even if proved not. at least they get your correct address. they'd have to link the old IVA times scale to a payment  these IVA F&F pots (if thats where it came from) most mugs dont even know they are not only taking most of your payments on fees but also creaming money off to supposedly offer F&F's.  funny when the IVA fails or is complete these sums of money in F&F pots never get given back or even mentions... these IVA firm directors esp with regard to knightsbridge and creditfix were fined and struck off more times than Paul Burdell of Link Fame and still managed to continue to scam people.
  • 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 
        • 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

Local Garage lied about repair and damaged vehicle- insurer claims garage owner is mob boss


Brownguy53
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 490 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

In brief this is my claim and issues-

 
Chronological Incident Summary-
 
26th August 2022- My car -XXX breaks down and in the early hours of 03:00am on 27th August AA towed it to XXXX Garage & MOT  Station in XXXXX
I went to this garage as XXXX a personal friend, XXXX(an ex-colleague) XXXX who had done a major service on my car and the AA recommended me the garage.
 
27th August 2022- I went to the garage physically to let them know it was my vehicle on their property and spoke to the garage owner- ‘XXXX’ who promised me the car would be looked at the following Tuesday on 30th August 2022.
I also let them know that my phone at this point natively records incoming and outgoing calls and made them aware- which they said was no problem- of the garage owner himself.
 
1st September 2022 at 12:21- I received a call from XXXX at the garage which I attach the call recording of he stated in this recording both the flywheel and clutch needed replacing and had needed repairing.
There was also some discussion during this car about trying to claim on AA parts cover which I had with my breakdown- however he made it clear I could only claim for the flywheel not the clutch as it was worn.
This claim was never successful as AA refused to pay out as they said XXX from garage never responded to them to with photographs of the parts he had changed.
 
8th September 2022 at 17:11-XXX rang me and said they had received the clutch and would have it done for Monday for 12th September 2022. (I have this call recording- can send if needed.)
 
10th September 2022 19:35-XXX rang me and said they had ‘fitted the clutch and flywheel’ however the car wasn’t going into first gear properly ‘with ease’ so they believed the clutch needed bleeding so they would do this on Monday 12th September 2022. (I have this call recording– can send if needed.)
 
12th September 2022 14:46- XXXX tells me the car isn’t fixed and he says I quote ‘we put all genuine things on it’ referring to my vehicle but now claimed there was something wrong with the ‘thrust bearing’ so he needed a few more days. I told him at this point I wasn’t happy with the service and the fact that his communication or updates were poor on the repair. He told me ‘it was hard and I was struggling to get anyone to do the thing’ -quoting him  He promised me at this point he would not work on any other cars until mine was done at this point. He then went and blocked me off contacting the garage’s facebook page at this point.

(I have this call recording of this conversation which I can send if needed.)
 
14th September 2022 12:49- XXXX called me and said the thrust bearing is definitely faulty on the car so he was waiting for a new one to be delivered. He said the car would be done on the same day once it was delivered.

15th September- The car was still not repaired as per XXX's word so I told him if it was going to take any longer it was effecting my earnings and at this point I told him he had my vehicle for near enough 3 weeks. He offered me £100 for car hire as he said it would be another week but I could not find anywhere for car hire at this price- all of the quotes I was obtaining were £240 for a week so I let him know this was not enough to cover it- he told me he was making no profit on this job and couldn’t do anything more.
(I have call recording proof of this and can send it if required.)
 
20th September at 11:05- (I had heard nothing again and communication was poor. I therefore asked the people who recommended me XXXX Autocentre about him as I started becoming suspicious something was going on- so I had messaged XX and XX who recommended me the garage etc if it was normal or they had ever had any issues.) I then at 11:05 on this date got a call from XXX angry that I had spoken to people about him. 
He said they had ‘fluid leaking’ in the car during this call and they needed to strip it down again and that my ‘chasing of my car’ was overzealous and he tried to make me feel bad about it.
(I have the call recording proof of this and can send it I required.)
 
21st September at 12:45- XXX called me back- This time he said the ‘slave cylinder’ had split and they had ordered a new one and it would be there and I would have it back on 22nd September 2022.
 
22nd September- heard nothing rang and was told car still wasn’t done but XX Xwould ring me by his mechanics.
 
23rd September at 10:19- XXX called me back as the 22nd had passed and I questioned him about why it was taking so long and I told him I had spoke to other mechanics independently who said a clutch/flywheel change should not take this long and he got very defensive and aggressive and XXX threatened me saying ‘he can make the repair last weeks if I want him too’ – I felt intimidated by this as he had my car and it in bits and I was losing money as I could not get to work.

He also during this call told me ‘I can Oh flip off and take it somewhere else’ if I don’t like him doing the repair his way. 
I mentioned to him during this call that I was loosing money too from work and I needed it sorting ASAP.
I was told to stop ringing in about the car and ‘harassing him’ too and again at this point I let him know I had not harassed them and I had phone call recordings to prove it but that I was promised call backs that did not happen.
I have this phone call recording for you to see how aggressive, rude and threatening the garage owner wasXXXX
 
24th September at 17:26- I was rang back by XXX told the clutch was fixed and flywheel and the prior leak was fixed but now there was a gearbox leak.
I asked him how a gearbox leak had occurred and questioned this during this call and he said he thought it was as the ‘gearbox had been out so many times’ by themselves.
He told me now the repair wouldn’t be tomorrow and would be Monday 26th September 2022.
I have this phone call recording if needed.
 
27th September at 18:41- XXX  rang me- told me the car was now fixed all seemed ‘good’ with no leaks and had been test driven ‘4-5 miles’ and was ‘all good’ and he just needed to ‘bleed the clutch more’ and clean ‘oil marks’ and stains off the car. I explained to him my family couldn’t take anymore time off work to drive me about or for childcare matters.
 
28th September 2022- 15:00 – Car is paid for and picked up and collected.

5th October 2022- There is a burning smell so I call AA out who tell me to take it to another garage and tow it there on there van. 
I take it to XXXX another local garage and service Station who charge me £60 to do an inspection on the car and within 1 hour ring me at 09:55am as per attached phone call recording claim the garage have damaged serious components.
The garage let me record the video of damage with their mechanic which is attached and do the attached report confirming poor repair job on clutch and confirm the flywheel has never been replaced also.

They confirm that the oil sump was jacked into and has been welded together, a heat shield is missing, key screws and also that the gearbox is leaking inside itself within a high volume of gearbox fluid which is causing the burning smell as this fluid is moving onto the clutch.
 
5th October 2022 at 10:53- I ring XXX Autocentre and let them know the above and he claims he wants to see the reports and see the car. I tell him I will send him photos and videos and reports over and ask for his email which he gives me- I then send an email outlining my complaint to him which is attached with some of the evidence ie the mechanic video, report etc.
 
I have never heard back from XXX Autocentre since this point and therefore on 13th October asked XXX Service Station to repair the gearbox leak only so the car was safe to drive.
They are currently working on the car and aim to have it back to me on 24th October- there will be more evidence at this point and another report with photos/videos then from them with further evidence.
 
I have suffered a financial employment loss, taxi costs, one day van hire cost for work, mental anguish and significant damages were done to the car by XXX which I want paying for to be rectified.
I also feel that lying to me was fraudulent as he claimed to repair the flywheel but has not done so and therefore entitled to my money back for the £1650 paid to him or at least some of it partially.
 
I therefore contacted my car insurer's legal cover team who state I can claim through them.
 
I am told to try resolve it with garage again. I try and do this and am offered £900 settlement.
I am told I must take this by the insurer however I explain that the repair cost me £900.01 + £60 inspection cost + £1650 initial clutch/flywheel cost.
I go to take the offer and am told by original garage offer has expired and is £90.00 now.
I go back to insurer who says they'll do a 'track and trace' with a private investigator.
 
In December 2022 insurer's legal team ring me say the garage owner doesn't even own the premises, is a front and he is a 'underworld connected' 'criminal' and 'mob boss' with connections to 'modified car gangs'.
 
Am told the insurer will not pay out any further and claims over with insurer as garage owner has no fixed asset so insurance terms is greater than 51% chance to win plus recoverable loss chance.
 
I send trace and trace to garage owner and ask if he will settle for £900.00 even though I make a loss and give him 7 days to consider and pay me- otherwise advise him will take matter to small claims court.
 
Shockingly today garage owner comes back on Jan 9th and says the report is fake from the insurer he's contacted the investigators who claim I never instructed them.
I ring the investigator who claims I shouldn't have sent the track and trace and he only confirmed to garage I did not instruct him but was not answering if insurer instructed him.
Take it up with insurer who fobs me off and says I am claiming the solicitor/legal insurer is acting on my behalf- I send them emails clarifying i told garage 3 times they are no longer.
 
Explain this to garage owner who responds saying 'offer is off table see you in court and claims I am trying to extionate him' .
 
This does all make me wonder did the insurers legal team perhaps exaggerate the report to avoid paying out a legal claim to me?
 
Today have done a POC as per below-
 
1The claimant's car broke down and was towed to the defendant's garage. The claimant was advised by the defendant it needed a new clutch and flywheel.
 
2. The work was carried out without reasonable skill and care.
 
3. The claimant's car was damaged by poor workmanship during the repair attempts made by the defendant and the flywheel was not replaced as described- caused by the defendant's breach of their contractual duty and reasonable care.
 
4. Claimant has attempted to resolve this with the defendant for numerous months and reported incidents to police. The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from 28/09/2022 to 09/01/2023 on £2,550.54 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £74.47
Link to post
Share on other sites

Briefly, in one sentence, or one paragraph, what do you need help with?

Never read past the first paragraph.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

have you sent a letter of claim yet?

 

 

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Fill it out.

Send it to the court and their solicitors.

 

Can we have a copy of their defence filled please.

 

Dx

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi guys so just a quick one..looking for some advice and help...

 

This is the defence attached from the garage.

 

Now the police as per attached letter also state they're investigating the garage.

 

I've also put in a complaint against the solicitor they instructed (my insurer) as it looks like he's using his mis understanding of thinking i instructed a solicitor to complex and elude the original damage he did by stating the documents provided were fraudulent.

 

 

Within my complaint to the insurer am asking they write to court to rectify this and or/be a witness as at the minimal very unhappy.

 

So...

in terms of the small claims...

 

I have online sent back my directions questionnaire and a reset for mcol online as i attached two government gateway id's so couldn't login...

 

ive only done the original POC..

 

should at some point I not be sending in a bigger more detailed POC where I can address some of the defendant garages lies?

 

Also heard nothing from the police despite chasing- do the fraud teams actually do anything in cases like this?

 

just to clarify the defence and why this garage thinks this next to the fact he is a liar and arrogant anyway...

 

 when i communicated with him before small claims court- the insurer's solicitor told me not to tell him they were through insurance as it would weaken my legal case.

 

He therefore on recieving the track and trace after them telling me hes a mobster underworld figure etc contacted them and asked if i had instructed them..they of course said no..because my insurer instructed the solicitor..and the solicitor instructed the private investigator..so to him it would appear they were never instructed and fraudulent but this isn't the case..

 

All his attached evidence was is the email exchange between us- nothing further.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't use hosting sites 

 

Put everything in one mass pdf.

Read upload.

 

Dx

 

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

Help on what?

Please put your docs up as pdf here as I asked then they might help 

 

Dx

 

 

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...