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

LoidPhil v HSBC **WON**


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6172 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

Quick, Freaky, get me that Ambulance!

 

Would you believe it but less than 2 hours after sending an email to Kate to inform her that my Court Bundle is on the way, I was sat down with a cup of tea and a biscuit when the phone rang..........and Rachel Dabydoyal from DG Solicitors announced herself. I nearly choked on my Ginger Snap!

 

Rachel informed me that due to the amount of claims with which Kate is dealing some of them, including my wife's, had been passed to her. She informed me that a letter will be sent to my wife by 1st class post today, but she couldn't disclose what that contained as I was not the account holder (despite my wife having sent them written authority to deal with, and disclose information to, me). Anyway I didn't argue the toss and merely thanked Rachel for getting in touch.

 

So, I'll be waiting to snap the Postie's hand off in the morning. Let's hope it's good news!!! Please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 81
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Wow! that sounds great to me! It has got to be the offer!

My predictions are getting better!

Don't let the postie pass without checking the bag!

 

So it could be perfect timing. Big lump in the bank and big lump out............No no no I won't go on, sorry!

 

Keep us posted on both forthcoming happy events!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow!!! It's been a rocky old ride since 27 February but it's almost time to jump off.

 

I still can't quite believe it but DG, with their usual standard template (apart from one bit that I'll address later), have offerred an "ex-gratia" payment totalling the full amount of charges, plus interest, plus another £100 on top. What a result :D I do not intend to comply with their request to keep the details confidential.

 

Thanks for all the support and assistance from fellow CAG members - too many to name individually, but I must single out Latty - you're always there for everyone with your words of wisdom and encouragement. A true gem!

 

I have a theory on the additional monies, and something that others may wish to adopt in terms of future nudge letters to DG. In my 3rd (and what turns out to be final) nudge I stated the following and had every intention of pursuing it further such was my annoyance at their failure to speak to me and save me the time and effort of producing the court bundle:-

 

Furthermore, if you fail to submit your evidence to the court by the latest date as directed by the Distric Judge, should judgement be subsequently found in my favour I hereby notify you of my intention to seek appropriate counsel regarding the submission of a Wasted Costs Order. This would be on the basis that you had no intention of defending my claim in court and were merely abusing the court process in order to prolong this matter, which appears to have been the approach in numerous other cases of which I am aware.

 

In response they have stated that:-

 

Finally, we take note of your intention to seek counsel regarding the submission of a 'wasted costs order'. HSBC has not acted unreasonably. The only basis that you have given for asserting that HSBC acted unreasonably is your view that HSBC "had no intention of ever defending my claim in court". You seem to be suggesting that it was somehow unreasonable for HSBC to have entered a Defence to your claim. Their is nothing inappropriate or unreasonable about this. It is of course open to a defendant against whom a claim has been issued to defend the claim and then seek to negotiate to see if an appropriate settlement can be reached.

I just wonder if the extra £100 is something of a sweetener, i.e. we appreciate that we've wasted your time. Please don't proceed with a Wasted Costs Order - here's £100 for your incidental costs. I can think of no other valid reason, barring a mistake (to my benefit), why they would want to pay out more than what we'd asked for. I'm not going to argue the point though, and probably won't proceed with a Wasted Costs Order as a result.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just incase you need one this is the acceptance letter I used!

 

Date

Dear Whoever

Ref: Your Offer of Settlement

 

Account: xxxxxxxx

Sort Code xx-xx-xx

Claim No: XXXXX in XXXX County Court

 

I acknowledge receipt of your letter date xx/xx/xx and your settlement offer of £XXX

 

I accept your offer as full and final settlement only for this claim of bank charges made on my account between xx/xx/xx and xx/xx/xx(dates of first and last charge)

 

I accept this offer without prejudice and I reserve the right to make any further claims should you apply future charges that may be considered unlawful under common law or in violation of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 or Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

 

I will be willing to withdraw my claim upon receipt of unconditional full settlement of my claim.

 

I am also not prepared to agree to any confidentially clauses you try to impose, unless of course your client wishes to make an offer of due consideration in addition to the amount of £xxxxx, in order to be afforded this privilege by myself.

 

I trust that you will find this arrangement acceptable.

 

Yours Sincerely

Link to post
Share on other sites

CONGRATULATIONS

When you want to fool the world, tell the truth. :D

Advice & opinions of Janet-M are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you have any

doubts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

CONGRATULATIONS!!!!

LOIDPHIL -YOU DONE WELL!

HOW IS MRS.LP - NOT IN LABOUR YET?

in all seriousness - i expect you to call the infant LATERLUS!

 

really, i'm over the moon for you - what a day!

now go be a terrific papa - and be sure and let us know when junior makes an appearance. bet o/h is happy - isn't she? probably wants to go to mothercare to s pend a few bob! is this your first?

 

very, very happy for you -

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...