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
      • 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

claim against barclaycard issued

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6396 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

I issued court proceeding against Barclaycard on 19 December and the Litigation and Dispute Dept acknowledged service on 28 December and therefore they have 28 days from the date of service ie 24 December to file a defence. They have yet to do so or indeed not made any offer to settle. Does anybody came so far with Barclaycard and what was the outcome. I am prepared to go to court...





Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Barnabus

Yes this quite normal with Barclays/woolwich ect. they will go all the way, But they still have not taken one to court:)

Let us know when their defence hits your door mat.





HBOS *SETTLED* 8th Oct 06


Monument (Barclays) *SETTLED*10thMar2007

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Barnabas

My MCOL was deemed served on 16/12/2006 to Barclaycard and I received a defence yesterday which was has 14 points on it. It also came with the AQ which I will complete on Sunday and post Monday and I suppose wait for a court date..... who knows if that will ever happen.

anyway good luck with you claim, and I should think you will receive yours Monday/Tuesday next week.


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your replies, much appreciated.Can you help me to complete the allocation questionnaire please. Defence was filed and states as follows:

  • The Claimants account is governed by the Defendants personal and/or business banking terms and conditions.
  • 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
  • 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)
  • The charges applied to the Claimants account are reasonable and are 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. Further, the charges are not default charges and, accordingly, cannot amount to a penalty.
  • Save as set out above, each and every allegation made by the Claimant is denied. For the reasons set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

Thanks again for taking time to write to me.


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...