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
      • 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

Mailman vs HSBC Round 2 - Defence Filed

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6404 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

HSBC has filed there defence, as below, so if anyone has any advice for how I counter their defence that would be most appreciated.

What I find most interesting is that they do not consider these fee’s default charges? Is that something that needs to be taken in to consideration?

Also as part of my rebuttal can I refer the court to my previous county court claim (£160) where HSBC paid out? This claim is for a mere £80.

Please note that all spelling and grammar errors are as per the letter I received from the county court J


1. The claimants account is governed by the defendants personal and or business banking terms and conditions.

2.Pursuant to the Defendants terms and conditions the defendant is entitled to make a charge for its services as set out in the defendants price list, including an overdraft review fee for considering whether to provide and providing and overdraft.

3. The defendant denies that the charges applied to the claimants account amount to penalties at common law and or unfair contract terms for the purposes of the unfair terms in consumer contracts regulations 1999 (UTCCRs).

4. The charges applied to the claimants account are reasonable and properly and fully disclosed in the defendants terms and conditions and published price list. The charges represent the contractually agreed price for the services provided and the UTCCRs are not applicable to them; alternatively, they are not unfair contrary to the UTCCRs. Further, the charges are not default charges and, accordingly, cannot amount to a penalty.

5. Save as set out above, each and every allegation made by the claimant is denied. For reasons set out above, it is denied that the claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

Any help or advice would be most appreciated.




Link to post
Share on other sites

just checking a couple of things then you can bump again.

when is your aq due?

have you had any contact with dg?

did you send your breakdown to them and if so, did you check that they received it?

i'm sure you are aware - they tend to close your acct after a 2nd claim - do you have another one lined up? if not, better do it quickly.

i'm sure you know all this but i'll put it here for you anyway.

Allocation Questionnaires - A guide to complet and this one:

New strategy for Allocation Questionaires

and my question:

yes, bong - been meaning to ask - does it mean just copy out that letter and attach to the n150/N149 along with it, anything else to do with it??

or is it the answer to one of the questions on the aq.

and bong's answer:

if its an N149 AQ at G (other information) write


I believe that the case will last no longer than one hour.


This issue is not a complicated one; it is an issue of fact and not of law. The issue is only whether the money levied by the Defendant in respect of its customer’s contractual breaches exceed their actual costs incurred. I am happy to pay their actual costs and I am surprised the Defendant did not counterclaim for these, because I would have paid them without argument.


However, the continuing problem is (in common with the 100s of other cases currently being brought by other bank customers) that the banks refuse to reveal the details of their penalty-charging regime. As the banks have a fiduciary duty towards their customers, they have a duty to deal straightforwardly and in utmost good faith.


Accordingly, I would respectfully ask that the attached draft direction be made into an order.


I believe this would bring a rapid end to this litigation.


If its an N150 AQ, at F tick yes and then no, and at H write the same text as above, but not the line about the case lasting for one hour as this has been answered elsewhere in the questionnaire.


You then attach the draft direction, making sure you have added your own case and court name and claim number etc.


hope that all helps - but get back with the answers to the first part - so we can advise. and by all means bump if you need more than what's here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...