Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
  • 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

What are my rights? Defective front door replaced with defective front door under warranty.. TWICE!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 171 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

36 minutes ago, BillyGoat22 said:

Approach Solidor themselves?

yes as i said. i doubt its costing thistle anything which is why they are soo happy to do it. i will guess solidor pay them to swap for replacements too. and at an inflated price, thistle will not be losing over this only solidor will.

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

33 minutes ago, dx100uk said:

his elder next door neighbour has been in the estate since 1962 and says they've done this for about 20yrs! 

Madness! So if it is as you say, this situation could repeat itself for quite a while.
 
I'll get in contact with Thistle and Solidor and see if I can get some more information out of them regarding warranty replacements and their guarantees.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So interestingly  @dx100uk Thistle have come back and said that they are the ones who cover the replacement fitting costs.

As I thought they have also confirmed that the manufacturer 10 year guarantee is from the date of purchase and NOT for each new door.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorts that one out...thought so...

dx

  • I agree 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

With Thistle being the ones who cover the cost of the installation rather than the manufacturer Solidor, I was surprised they are happy to keep replacing the door for the next 5 years.

So now I need to figure out the next step. Do I;

- Approach Thistle and remind them how much man time its using to replace the door each time in the hopes I can negotiate a for a door that works.

-demand a door that works and threaten to get a Solicitor & Ombudsman involved as is my rights by law.

(my only concern here is that Thistle argue that they are doing the right thing and replace it every year - then after that period I'm left with a defective door again)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Compared to many companies, this will seem to be attempting to do the right thing although it is clear that they don't really understand what the right thing should be.

The right thing should be that they provide you with a door which is of satisfactory quality and remains that way for a reasonable period of time – starting from the date of the initial installation. I think we have already agreed that that is probably in the region of 40 years and I'm sure that there are doors which lost an awful lot longer.

You are talking about getting a solicitor and an ombudsman. There is no ombudsman for this kind of thing and it will be very interested anyway. Are you really serious about getting a solicitor? Have you any idea what this will cost you?
You have come to us for help and we can help you all the way on this if you want.

It is scarcely surprising that they intend simply to honour 10 year guarantee from the date of original installation. But it is about time that you stopped talking about guarantees and started talking about satisfactory quality and the length of time that an item that you buy should remain satisfactory.

We have already dealt with this earlier on in this thread but you don't seem to have taken the point quite yet.

I think you need to work out a position and then we can decide on a plan.

I asked you earlier on have you found any equivalent doors made by other manufacturers. I'm not sure that you have addressed this question

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 21/10/2023 at 14:07, BankFodder said:

The consumer rights act 2015 requires that when you buy goods, they are satisfactory quality and that they remain that way for a reasonable period of time.

59 minutes ago, BankFodder said:

But it is about time that you stopped talking about guarantees and started talking about satisfactory quality and the length of time that an item that you buy should remain satisfactory.

As has already been said, guarantees are trumped by the consumer rights act. You must now stop thinking in terms of guarantees and start thinking in terms of your Statutory Consumer Rights.... Law overrules "guarantees".

A guarantee/warranty is only actually useful if it offers you more than your legal rights.

i.e. Some shops allow you to return an item just because you "changed your mind".

You aren't entitled to this in law. (Unless it's mail order).

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

Understood. So I should be focusing more on the Satisfactory quality of the product and consumer rights.

@BankFodder I'll get some quotes together for similar doors at that price point.

Obliviously I would like to tackle this myself, though this is all new to me so your help is much appreciated.

I just need to figure out where to start.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Get the quotes and come back here.

Make sure the quotes are at least for doors and installations which are at least of the quality that you originally contracted for – even if they are a bit more expensive.

Then your approximate first step will be to contact the supplier of your existing door and explain to them that although you appreciate their efforts to deal with the problem, you purchased a door which you expected by any reasonable standard to last for at least 40 or 50 years and that clearly hasn't happened.

You are coming up with a number of alternatives.

The first alternative is for them to replace your door with the very much more expensive one at no cost to you. You would explain that contractually this is what they are bound to do. However you appreciate that there is a great discrepancy in price so that you have looked around and you have found the following alternative solutions:
number one – blah blah blah £XXX
number two – blah blah blah £XXX

Et cetera

Number XXX value £XX is your preferred solution. You are inviting them to agree to cover the cost of that purchase and installation in order to bring the problem to an end and to mitigate everybody's losses.

Get your quotes. Come back here. We will help you draft a letter and see what happens.

If they won't play ball then we will help you go ahead and sue them for the more expensive door.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As well as looking at quality of replacements, also consider the aesthetics.

You obviously chose a particular style of door for a reason.

You want it to be (and are entitled to have) a very similar design.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...