Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've got some suggestions re Bizspace but can you fill in the sticky please.
    • 1 Date of the infringement 14th April 2024 2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 17th April 2024 [scan up BOTH SIDES as ONE PDF- follow the upload guide] please LEAVE IN LOCATION AND ALL DATES/TIMES/£'s 3 Date received 20th April 2024 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] N 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? ANPR photos of vehicle in and out (although as they were taken at night they don’t show much). 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] N Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up  N 7 Who is the parking company? MET Parking 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Southgate Park, Stansted CM24 1PY For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. Independent Appeals Service POPLA  - BPA Logo is on NTK If you have received any other correspondence, please mention it here. N/A Hi, As keeper, I have received a PNC from MET Parking over the vehicle being parked in the infamous Stansted Starbucks/Mcdonald’s car park(s). The vehicle was parked outside Starbucks (at night, when it was closed) and the driver went into Mcdonalds. However, the driver wishes to appeal due to the poor and misleading unlit signage, and believes that this PNC is unfair. I am sure you are aware of this company/car park, and I would appreciate any advice on this matter. Kind regards PNC 14.04.2024.pdf
    • The PCN is one of the more compliant that I have seen. however it still fails. There is no period of parking mentioned as required by paragraph 9[2][a] . ANPR cameras only capture the arrival an departure times. It does not record the times you drove from the entrance to the parking place and then from the parking spot to the exit. That means that if you are the keeper then you are not liable to pay the PCN. Only the driver is so do not appeal as you may reveal who was actually driving.if you were not the keeper then as long as the driver is not identified CE will have difficulty on that fact alone. The majority of people with valid motor insurance are allowed to drive your car  and Courts do not accept tha that the driver and the keeper are the same person. On top of that your car was trespassing there since you didn't have a Permit and only the land owner can pursue you not the monkey they employ. The signage is prohibitory in that only permit holders can park there so no contract can be formed. The signage is new apparently so there must be some time allowance for motorists to adjust to the new signs which could mean that  they shouldn't even be issuing you with a PCN. For all those reasons I wouldn't be too much in a hurry to pay them a penny. And well done on posting up the PCN and that sign so quickly. 
    • Dear CAG Team   Given the above, and not knowing what the actual account name is, I will haver to stick with that same name but the Bailiff said that once the variation is done there wont be an issue getting the money off him. What i cannot get my head around is when i set up a new payee, if the name doesn't match the account name my bank wont allow the transfer. So how is it that it authorised and allowed the transfer? Also, given the dealer broike trading standard rules and tried to sell me a death trap, then keep my deposit, why is his bank and mine protecting him by not disclosing his account name or at least making a charge back as i first attempted?   Many thanks
  • 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

Canvas Castle (USA online site) - 2 canvas print i dont like - they are saying tough luck - chargeback time?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 126 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

I bought two canvas prints from a company called Canvas Castle.

They arrived but I don't like how they have turned out and want to return; however they are being difficult.

Firstly they said they have some "all sales are final" line on their site (they do have this line but it does not actually detail what this means or entails) 

I replied saying their site also says "30 day money back guarantee"; t

o which they say that only replies to defective items,

but again, this is not detailed on their site. 

I don't think I am going to get anywhere with them at all,

I presuming I should try and get a chargeback via my bank on the transaction.

What justification would I need to give for the bank to proceed with this?

The company is in the U.S

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you say "I don't like how they have turned out " what do you mean? Were these tailor-made or personalised items of some sort, made specifically for you and not a standard stock item?

Please give us a timeline. In particular  on what date did you place the order (I'm assuming it was online)?  And on what date did you tell them you wanted to return the prints? How did you tell them - by email?

Is this the company?   

WWW.CANVAS-CASTLE.COM

Canvas Castle creates beautiful canvas art that make your walls dance. We are the cheapest high-quality canvas company in the world, specializing in...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't like how they have turned out

- which is subjective I know -

I don't think the reason matters as surely there is a right of return whatever the reason and a 14 day cooling off period for products bought online (I am still within this) -

my problem is the company is in the U.S. 

- all communication is by email 

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Portoman said:

I just don't like how they have turned out - which is subjective I know - , but I don't think the reason matters as surely there is a right of return whatever the reason and a 14 day cooling off period for products bought online (I am still within this) - but my problem is the company is in the U.S. 

That's why I was asking you about the timeline! 

The Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013 apply to any company selling to UK consumers online even if it is based in the USA. The problem of course is how to enforce the Regulations against a US company with no UK business presence. So in practice I would say a chargeback is the only realistic way of getting your money back. As a matter of interest how much money  are you trying to get back?

EDIT  "...they are saying their prints are made to order, which I don't really believe....".  Even if true is it irrelevant as that doesn't exclude them from your right to cancel and return. Goods are only excluded if they are "made to the consumer's specifications or are clearly personalised". Paragraph 28 (1) (b) of The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 (legislation.gov.uk)     Make sure they know that you are exercising your right under this UK law. They may not care about UK law but it will help your chargeback request.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Canvas Castle (USA online site) - 2 canvas print i dont like - they are saying tough luck - chargeback time?

yep doesn't matter where they are it's an online purchase and not custom made. you dont need a reason to return anything within 14 days of 'seeing' it. (old DSR rules now part of the consumer rights act)

their website will be obviously designed under USA consumer rules , sadly this is a big problem for across the pond as they dont have any consumer rights... we do...🤣

thread title updated

 

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

if you paid debit card - cb

credit card - s75 + cb


I cant see section 75 having been advised here but it should work

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you today?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

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...