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

Medical Results - possibly wrong diagnosis


Recommended Posts

The risk here is if DVLA revoke your license. It is then an uphill battle to get it back, and when you do you’ll lose any “automatically granted C1” [if your test pass was pre-1997]

so, you might be better to VOLUNTEER to hand back your license for now, (take a copy of it, front AND back, so any e.g. C1 entitlement doesnt 'disappear'

Then get your medical proof, including a sleep specialists opinion on when your condition is

a) “ adequately controlled", and

b) that they say you are safe to drive.

Then advise DVLA of your assessment, the fact your licence wasnt revoked, that you are applying for your licence back (if need be on a 1, 2, or 3 year renewal medical licence)


Why the palaver? because Drivers Meficsl Group take ages (way more than their 18 week target). If your license was revoked you cant drive until a new one is issued (and any pre-99 C1 entitlement will have gone). If your license wasn't revoked but you surrendered it, when you get the evidence to get it back, as soon as you apply you can drive again (in the UK, not abroad), under S.88 of the road traffic act


This is why you may well be better to have a short period of voluntary surrender than the hassle you’ll get if DVLA revoke your license.

1) photocopy anything you send DVLA for when they say they’ve lost it.

2) Send anything special delivery for when they say it wasn’t received (at which point, when you offer proof it was received - see 1))

recorded gets signed for ‘en bloc’, Special signed for individually: hence Special instead of Recorded (for the individual signature rather than the ‘next day’ aspect)

3) Record any calls. They’ll lie (or, at least be mistaken and make errors), saying complaints weren’t made when they were, that a complaint was made but unfortunately missed being recorded, that there isn’t any appeals mechanism, or that appeals are dealt with by the same people so there is no point in appealing. (1st appeal is to Drivers Med Group, 2nd is to DVLA chief exec, next is to PHSO [Ombudsman] via your MP

If they unfairly refuse, you can appeal to magistrates court, but it’s more usual they just “don’t make a decision” for over 6 months - hence why the S88 route is important 




  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t forget : medical professionals shouldn’t report you to DVLA (absent you not having capacity to do so yourself, or deliberately failing to do so)

Because of confidentiality the ideal is they don’t report you. You inform DVLA and the DVLA forms you then complete make it clear you are giving permission for those medical professionals to respond to a DVLA enquiry.

(For info, and I hope it wouldn’t come to it for most sensible people who don’t lack capacity:)

However, if it is clear someone lacks capacity to inform DVLA (so, if they are a dementia sufferer, for example) , they can inform DVLA on the basis the person would do so if they were capable, and there is a clear public interest aspect.

Similarly, if they advise someone who is competent to inform DVLA, and the person chooses not to, they might then repeat to that patient that they MUST inform DVLA, and if that too fails, suggest (for example) a second opinion. If all else fails AND the medical professional believes the person continuing driving represents a risk to others of death or serious harm :  they can inform the patient that they will be informing DVLA (and then do so). Again : on a public interest basis, and trying reasonable alternatives first.

Edited by BazzaS
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...