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
      • 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

Lowell Financial CCA Letter Mumbojumbo reply


laureli
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5789 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

It's 12 days (+2 for delivery), original creditor or not. Read the Act.

Always send stuff like this by REC/DEL.

 

After 12 days they're in default and whilst it is, it's un-enforceable even in court, if in default for a full calendar month an offence has been commited.

 

That letter you got off Lowell laureli is a standard computer letter the same as the one I got.

 

And it's never a good idea to talk to these kinda ppl on the phone. Keep it in writing so there's a papertrail and nothing can be denied.

 

Good luck, Dave.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah lesson learned on the recorded delivery thing...

 

can anyone explain what the criminal act is?

 

Also, I did ask them to tell me where it was in the CCA 1974 that they've got 28 days and he said section 77...

 

Id still also like to know what they wanted with my passport!

 

1. Not supllying a true copy after 12 days +2 and then a calender month.

2. don't ask them to tell you anything!!! It's not your job!!! They have to comply with the Act, it's not for you to be chasing them!

3. Hiding behind Data Protection Act! Answer to this is that they didn't

need your passport to write to you in the first place! Call their bluff!

 

Don't give in to these bullies!

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with you. DCAs are hounding my mentally ill wife relentlessly. I even sent them a letter from her GP saying the stress they were putting her under was "clearly detrimental to her mental and physical health" but they just piled on the pressure further hoping we would cave in. Well,the gloves are well and truly off now. It's outright war against DCAs everywhere!

 

Don't they just make your blood boil!

 

Send them a letter headed, Protection from Harrassment Act 1997

and why you don't ever want to hear from them again! And, of course, if they

should feel the need to call again, that they'll be sued/reported for committing a criminal offence...

 

Good luck, Dave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...