Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Parts I don't want!

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6342 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

Two weeks ago I went to my local dealer to get my car MoT'd (had a cheap offer on)... it failed the MoT on 2 tyres, wing mirror loose and rear brakes. They wanted £110 for the tyres, £102 for the wing mirror and TWO HOURS LABOUR plus parts for the brakes - didn't know what parts the brakes needed until they have taken them apart. I agreed to take the car back in 4 days later to get the work done.


In the meantime I took the car to a garage which does free brake checks, to try to avoid the 2 hour labour cost if I could - only for them to be tested and told there was nothing wrong with them at all, and they couldn't see why they would fail the MoT. At this point I decided I would take the car elsewhere to get the MoT done and also got the tyres changed elsewhere. I called the original dealer the day before I was due to go back and told them I wouldn't be coming back in. When I went to the other garage for another MoT it failed only on the mirror - which they said they could fix with a bit of superglue for £10! (it's now stayed on fine for a week even in these storms!)


During this, as an oversight, I forgot that I hadn't paid the original dealer the cost of the MoT, so 2 days after I was due to go back in the "Service Manager" rang me up asking about payment. I immediately agreed to pay him via CC over the phone and asked him what the cost of the MoT was. He mentioned having parts which had been ordered in for me and I explained I had called to say I was going elsewhere. I thought this was the end of it... a few days later I got a parcel from the dealer, containing - a mirror, and a credit card receipt for the MoT cost AND the mirror.


So my question is where do I stand, I did originally verbally agree to take the car back in, but nothing was signed. Also, as the original mirror was easily repairable at a much cheaper cost, should they not have offered me this option originally? Not to mention the fact they were going to charge me 2 hours labour for brakes which were subsequently tested twice and found not to be faulty! Can I just send the mirror back and demand a refund, or could they say there was a verbal contract in place for me to purchase it?


MBNA VISA - PL sent 23/10

MBNA MCard - PL sent 23/10

FD - PL sent 23/10, offered approx 75% 27/10

Marbles - PL sent 23/10, rejected letter received 27/10

Link to post
Share on other sites

Normally I would say that there was a verbal contract between you and they could expect damages for having ordered your parts - but they would have to mitigate their losses - i.e. if they can sell the wing mirror to someone else at the same price they would have sold it to you for, their losses would then be zero and they wouldn't be able to charge you. If they had to send the mirror back to their supplier and incurred a charge for doing so, you would be liable for that charge.


HOWEVER, since they have been fairly dubious in their work so far, I would write to them advising them that you have found that the diagnostic work they did was incorrect (explain why in a bit more detail) and therefore you believe that they did not act with reasonable care and skill and the service they provided did not comply with the terms of the Supply of Goods and Services Act. Therefore it is understandable that you went elsewhere, and although you will not be personally pursuing the matter against the garage for the incorrect MoT work you do not expect to hear from them any further about the wing mirror.


(which should be returned to them if convenient to you)


NB, I would also copy this to your local Trading Standards department, they will probably keep the complaint on file to refer to if they are planning on any undercover work in the area of MoT/servicing.

  • Haha 1

Please note I'm not insured in this capacity, so if you need to, do get official legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you give him authorisation to debit the amount for the mirror from your credit card? If not, then I suggest that you contact your credit card company.


Surely, the mirror is their responsibility, and I cant see why their suppliers wouldnt accept it returned back to them, as it can be re-sold on.


Did they send you an invoice with the mirror from the original suppliers?


Also, you should consider complaining to VOSA about the bad service you received.





* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



***If i've helped you in any way, please click on the SCALES to the left and add to my reputation***




Barclays Bank - £2238.33 Settled 02/01/07

Bristol & West - S.A.R sent 12/01/07


Read my successful thread




'Money can't buy you happiness, but it does

bring you a more pleasant form of misery'

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

If you paid for this on credit card then call your credit card co and get them to relcaim the funds under Section 75 Consumer Credit Act (if memory serves).


Then pay for the one test and tell the garage about your opinion on their questionable business practices and report them to whom you see fit.



Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...