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 
        • 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

Son of Steven4064 vs GE Money **WON**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5595 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

Hi, Steven

 

Let's have a look at this, then.

 

Got a "get lost" letter from GE money this morning. So it's on to court - got the N1 from the local county court this morning. Our situation is slightly odd in that GE Money have already paid back the charges, but are refusing to pay back the interest on those charges. I have modified the 'standard' Particulars of Claim to fit. Does the assembled intellect, experience and general wisdom of the site have any comment? Here they are:

 

Brief particulars of claim:

 

Repayment of interest on amounts charged by the defendant and debited to an account with the claimant for purported breaches of a contract to supply credit services. The claimant avers that these charges and the interest thereon were levied against him in contravention of the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999), the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and the common law.

 

The Claimant claims:

a) the return of the interest of £168.05 charged on amounts debited in respect of charges in the sum of £372.00

b) Court costs

c) Interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts Act as set out on the attached list of charges from 10 June 2005 to 02 February of £22.55 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of 0.022%.

 

 

Full particulars:

 

IN THE TOYTOWN COUNTY COURT

 

BETWEEN

 

SoS4064 CLAIMANT

 

And

 

GE Capital Bank Limited, trading as GE Money DEFENDANT

 

 

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

 

1. The Claimant had an account number xxxxxxxx, ("the Account") with the Defendant which was opened on or around 31st May 2002.

 

2. During the period in which the Account has been operating the Defendant has automatically debited numerous charges to the Account in respect of purported breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant and also charged interest on the charges once applied. The Claimant understands that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimant.

 

3. A list of the charges (“the Schedule”) applied is attached to these Particulars of Claim DELETE from here. but it should be noted that the charges have been repaid to the Claimant by the Defendant. TO HERE

 

4. The Claimant contends that:

 

a) The charges debited to the Account were punitive in nature; were not genuine pre-estimates of costs incurred by the Defendant; exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and are not intended to represent or related to any alleged actual loss, but instead unduly enrich the Defendant which exercises the contractual term in respect of such charges with a view to profit.

 

b) The contractual provision that permits the Defendant to levy such charges is unenforceable by virtue of

i) the Unfair Terms In Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 particularly but not limited to Regulations 5, 6 and 8 and Schedule 2, 1 e); and

ii); the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, particularly but not limited to sections 3 and 11 and Schedule 2 and

iii) the common law relating to liquidated damages and penalties in contracts.

 

5. To the extent that it is found that the Defendant’s charges are for the provision of credit services the Claimant contends that the price thereof is unreasonable pursuant to section 15 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.

 

6. The defendant had, in addition, levied interest on these charges at the rate of XX.XX%.

 

7. The defendant has repaid the charges themselves to the Claimant but has retained the interest it levied thereon.

 

8. The Claimant avers that, by this action, the Defendant has sought to enrich itself by the consequences of unlawful action, specifically, unlawful penalty charges as detailed above and applied in terrorem.

9. Accordingly the Claimant claims:

 

a) the return of the interest of £168.05 (one hundred and sixty-eight Pounds Sterling and five pence) debited to the Claimant’s account in respect of interest on charges detailed in the attached schedule, in the sum of £372 (threee hundred and seventy-two Pounds Sterling);

 

b) Court costs;

 

c) administrative costs and other costs incurred in the course of researching and preparing the claim; Can't do this - small claims procedure doesn't allow costs other than court costs. Delete and renumber.

 

c) Interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts Act as set out on the attached list of charges or at such rate and for such periods as the court deems just.

 

I believe that the contents of these particulars of claim are true

 

I think the amendments detailed above help to focus in on the interest and may make a case that's hard to answer. There are some other points made in another thread that I was looking at last night - can't remember which one, but I think it was either GaryH or Glen who made them. Check their posts.

 

 

Hope that helps.

 

best wishes

 

Westy

  • Haha 1

Westy

 

 

 

If you like my post, click the scales!!

 

Nov 1 2006 Preliminary letter

21 Feb 2007 - cheque arrived for charges+DEBIT interest +Statutory Interest! Hurray!

Read all about it: natwesttookmymoney - v- NatWest

DONATE AS MUCH AS YOU CAN TO KEEP THE SITE GOING.

 

What can you claim? Vampiress has a good idea:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/69877-what-can-you-claim.html

Anything I say is just a suggestion. I'm a bigmouth, not a lawyer!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Yes, because they could always change their minds. Follow your timetable, don't be distracted.

 

Westy

Westy

 

 

 

If you like my post, click the scales!!

 

Nov 1 2006 Preliminary letter

21 Feb 2007 - cheque arrived for charges+DEBIT interest +Statutory Interest! Hurray!

Read all about it: natwesttookmymoney - v- NatWest

DONATE AS MUCH AS YOU CAN TO KEEP THE SITE GOING.

 

What can you claim? Vampiress has a good idea:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/69877-what-can-you-claim.html

Anything I say is just a suggestion. I'm a bigmouth, not a lawyer!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Excellent, Bailey

 

Many Congratulations!:D

 

Don't spend it all at once!:eek:

 

Westy

Westy

 

 

 

If you like my post, click the scales!!

 

Nov 1 2006 Preliminary letter

21 Feb 2007 - cheque arrived for charges+DEBIT interest +Statutory Interest! Hurray!

Read all about it: natwesttookmymoney - v- NatWest

DONATE AS MUCH AS YOU CAN TO KEEP THE SITE GOING.

 

What can you claim? Vampiress has a good idea:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/69877-what-can-you-claim.html

Anything I say is just a suggestion. I'm a bigmouth, not a lawyer!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...