Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • That I get, but still confused about some of the advice above. On the one hand, I'm told that IGNORE IGNORE IGNORE no longer applies (in most cases?). And on the other, I'm advised that I might have shot myself in the foot by filling in their appeal form. Both cannot be correct.
    • Hi, hope that you can help with the PCN detailed below, unfortunately I have entered into correspondence (appeal) and identified the driver, hope that this doesn't have too much of an impact! On 26/05/2024 the driver entered the ANPR controlled car park to park but was unable to find suitable parking due to the car park being very busy. This took 11 minutes according to Wise ANPR details, this was due to other vehicles looking for parking and impeding the driver's progress. This has been appealed to both Wise Parking and IAS and the appeal has been rejected by both; unfortunately, the driver has been identified on the appeal. Note: the appeal response from Wise was not received until 04/07/2024, wise state (after me chasing) that it was sent by email on 17/05/2024 but this was not received and not in junk mail. I have completed the form below and attached correspondence (post and email) as a single pdf Please let me know if you need anything else.   1 Date of the infringement 26/05/2024   2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 29/05/2024   3 Date received Around 04/06/2024   4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?]  Y   5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Y   6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] Y Unable to find /access details of my appeal to Wise, however I will have revealed the identity of the driver My appeal to IAS: You completed the appeal on 06/07/2024 23:38:42. The car was not parked on this land. The reason for this was that there were no available parking spaces. I drove the car around the car park a few times searching for a space but was unable to obtain a space due to it being busy. I then left the car park without parking, I therefor did not make use of their facility or have the opportunity to check their terms and conditions as I did not leave the car. The appellant made their response on 08/07/2024 09:52:52. As I did not park due to lack of opportunity a "parking" charge is not appropriate. As can be seen from the ticket, I was only onsite for a few minutes which backs up my assertion that I did not park. No evidence has been provided that I did park, only that I entered and left 11 minutes later.   Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up Y   7 Who is the parking company? Wise Parking   8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Chapel Point, Chapel St Leonards   For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. IAS   If you have received any other correspondence, please mention it here I have received a response from both Wise and IAS rejecting my appeal     Wise Parking PCN - 26-05-2024.pdf
    • You mean the mediation Service. It's not from the court  Offering a date and time?  Dx   
    • Equivo are applying for an interim charging order although I know why they want to do this, I find it to be very unjust and needless in my point of view! and don't know why there is a continuing need to harrass me with a Charging Order. No payments have been missed since the order was made and a total of £360 paid to date The debt amount has not been reduced as they keep adding interest, the original debt was £1500 it now stands at £1700 The judgement didn't order a payment plan but we have agreed to one and for three years they have accepted my payment...not sure if that relevant? Also I live with my partner and they have sent her the same as she has a 50% claim to the property how can I stop this? many thanks Webbs   Interim Charging Order Creation Finance Old Flybe Card.pdf
  • 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
      • 162 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

Big Motoring world - Puddle in footwell the next day after purchasing


Recommended Posts

Hi, 

I hope I'm okay to post this here. I am looking for some advice. 

I purchased a car on 27.04.24 from Big Motoring World Enfield the car is an MG ZS 2022 Reg, I paid £11,200 for the car, £299 admin fee and £1650 for 36 months extended warranty. I used a debit card to pay. 

After purchasing the car I drove it home and parked it on the driveway.

It rained quite heavily overnight and in the morning on 28.04.24 I got in the car and found a huge puddle in the passenger footwell.

I took photos and a video.

After some investigation from myself I have found the water comes in from the windscreen into the inside of the car on the left and pools into the footwell.

I called Big Motoring World immediately but they were closed as it was a Sunday.

I emailed them an attached the pictures. 

I have followed up with the this morning but am yet to hear back. 

After reading reviews and this forum I now feel uneasy about keeping the car even if they are able to fix the leak as I'm worried about future problems arising.

I wanted to know if this would be classed as a defect to be able to request a refund?

Appreciate any advice! 

Thanks 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pinkyz44.

Welcome to CAG.

You should absolutely be asserting your short term right to reject on the vehicle.


It would be best to get an independent inspection done on the vehicle also, are there any glass repair/replacement companies near you that can look at this?
 

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 OTHER

 

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

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Hello,

Thanks for the advice.

I asserted my rights to reject and they accepted it and said they will refund me the full amount. 

My question now is how long do they usually take to collect the vehicle? I've made it clear that I'm available for them to collect it whenever and I've been told its been passed on to the collections team. I chased it up today as its also raining heavily at the moment. 

I just wondered if anyone had any experience on how long they usually take to collect? I'd obviously like it collected as soon as possible as I need to purchase another car. 

Is it likely they will drag on the process of collection and what can I do if they do? 

Thanks!

Edited by Pinkyz44
Link to post
Share on other sites

good news you won!

i cant see them taking more than a week if less.

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to Big Motoring world - Puddle in footwell the next day after purchasing **WON**
  • 3 weeks later...

Wow, £1,650 for 3 years warranty, their cost would be in the region of £200 per year, im being generous there and that would include breakdown cover etc.

Insurance backed warranties aren't as bad as people often state.

The problem is lack of understanding what is covered and customers often thinking (or being told) they 'cover everything'.

To be fair i doubt the retailer would have been aware of the water ingress beforehand.

Its fairly common on used cars and on some models im surprised if they dont have a leak in the usual place. That would be why the previous owner got out of that particular car i imagine.

The ingress doesnt usually cause any post repair issues, i've never had a vehicle come back with secondary problems but i'm sure it happens.

If its an Aygo they dry out within a couple of days, if its a BMW with underfloor speakers and control modules thats where the fear sets in.

The sales assistant made their commission that day for sure........

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • AndyOrch changed the title to Big Motoring world - Puddle in footwell the next day after purchasing

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...