Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Almost a Backdoor CCJ Britannia/BW PCN - managed to file defence late


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 129 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

Thanks @dx100uk yes it is form N180. It's actually Small Claims Track and not Fast Track

 

Sorry

 

From the post in the N180 link it says

 

'Relevant reasons to state no include that Relevant reasons to state no include that there are factual disputes which will need the judge to hear from witnesses directly (in which case please specify the factual dispute and the relevant witnesses) or that the issues are so complex they need to be argued orally (in which case please specify the factual dispute and the relevant witnesses) or that the issues are so complex they need to be argued orally'

 

Am I just using the ' there are factual disputes which will need the judge to hear from witnesses directly' part?

Im not sure as a judge could work with the 'I was the keeper not the driver reason for defence'

 

Sorry if sounding dim here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ypu need to use that yes, you must never agreee to an On The Paper's hearing as the lies they tell need to be challenged, they could put allsorts in to the court which without a hearing cannot be challenged. the other team members will be along soon to clarify fopr you.

  • Like 1

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

last reason dont give anything away.

3 hours ago, Restart said:

that the issues are so complex they need to be argued orally'

 

  • Like 1

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

Hi again

 

Had the attached in the mail yesterday.

 

I was wondering about this. I expect this to go to court (or is there still a chance that this will be dropped)? In the event I go to court. What would the process be on the day and if I lost, what are the likely outcomes?

 

Maybe I should have asked this before :-)

 

Thanks again

 

Claimants N180.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you get this form directly from solicitors,  it's usually been sent early as an intimidating tactic.

Check status on MCOL.

  • Like 1

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 The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Almost a Backdoor CCJ Britannia/BW PCN - managed to file defence late

yes i remember this one, you found a backdoor CCJ attempted and they hadn't filed for judgement as you managed to file a defence.

so you've each done N180's now by the looks of that BW email, unless it's a bluff?

 

so see if you get an n157 proposed allocation come thru from you local chosen n180 court.

 

it might now pay you to reply to that email from BW, stating email is not to be further used in relation to our mutual court matter.

that way you'll protect against getting faked docs etc countering your defence through from them 1 min before a court deadline, thus removing your chance to counter them.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

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

As mentioned above I emailed these and told them 'No email contact' to which they have replied the following. I won't be replying.

 

Good afternoon

 

 

Thank you for your recent email.

 

 

Please complete the following to enable us to discuss this –

 

 

BW Legal Reference:

Full Name:

First Line of Address:

Postcode:

Telephone Contact Number:

Vehicle Registration:

Vehicle Make or Model:

Parking Charge Number:

Street Name or Car Park:

Authorised Email address:

Confirmation you wish for us to correspond with you via this email address (Yes/No):

We make no commitment to response times on this general email account. Therefore, if you consider your matter is urgent, or should you wish to discuss your account with one of our helpful representatives today, you can call our offices on 0113 487 0432 and we will be happy to help.

You can also contact us by signing in or registering to our Customer Portal at www.bwlegal.co.uk.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

HAHA!

They want to "discuss" it...

 

Ah well, at least you now have confirmation that they received your instruction.

Keep it safe.

  • Like 2

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 The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

That could bite them if they have been told no email you have the proof you sent a cease & desist using email, and they still send them, those you save and use later.

  • Like 1
  • I agree 1

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send them a snail mail Cease and desist with a free proof of posting citing they have ignored your email to correspond by post only,

so the emails are archived and will be used as evidence as will any subsequent emails them may send

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

std letter they always send if you go read a few BW pcn claimform threads

 

simply sent to harass and intimidate ..

 

dx

 

  • Like 1

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

On 09/05/2023 at 10:38, Restart said:

Hi again.

Got the attached from BW Legal on Friday.

2023-04-28 BW letter.pdf 780.88 kB · 7 downloads

 

did that come by email?

 

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

No They seem to have (for now) stopped emailing me. But that could change :-)

The driver was unaware of any parking restrictions.

Was a customer of the premises and could easily have been validated had they known.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...