Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I found it cheers Dave!!   I think focusing on lack of compliance with legislation should be the one, seeing as we just lost the case to them by not complying, it will be worth pointing it out. I also want to poi t out their m.o. Which is less than honourable to say the least. Hopefully the judge will side with the little old lady and not the peoppe who use deceit to line their pockets!!   She said she is happy to speak up but is kindly asking for assistance in the form of a bullet pointed printed paper for her to take in so she can read out her points and leave it at that (without rambling).    Straight and to the point!!    Daves post #66 is legendary 🙌    Thanks for the help guys 😊    Let's kick some ass    
    • I differ from my site team colleague slightly in the the six-month rule applies if you have asserted your rights within the six months. My understanding is that you haven't asserted your rights during that time. In other words you haven't informed them that you are giving them a single opportunity to repair and if they decline or if the repair fails then you are rejecting the car for a refund. Please correct me if I'm wrong. On that basis, you are covered by the consumer rights act but not in terms of the right to reject. You are covered under the consumer rights act in that you are entitled to purchase a vehicle which is of satisfactory quality and remains that way for a reasonable period of time. You don't have to prove that the fault existed at the time of sale – although that's what they will try to tell you and even the motoring ombudsman will try to tell you that. But the motoring ombudsman is an industry led organisation which pretends to be an ombudsman but in fact favours the industry and its advice is wrong and even deceptive. I think you should start off by writing both to the finance company and also to the dealership. Describe the fault to them. Send them the evidence you have that the windscreen was incorrectly fitted and the damage which has been caused as a result. Send in the quotation for the work and require them to respond within seven days and that they must agree that the work will be carried out by a competent professional an authorised repairer. Not one of their cheapskate once. Also, you will want them to agree to provide you with a courtesy car. Also have you incurred any expenses associated with this? Travel, car hire, cost of inspections –?? Have you told us the name of the finance company? My site team colleague is correct that if they cause any trouble then you should see them as co-defendants. You can be certain that they will put their hands up. It will go to court. You would sue them for the cost of the work. You would recover your costs of the installation plus your court costs. I don't think you will be able to sue for the rejection of the vehicle on the basis of what you tell us in terms of having not asserted your rights. However you will be able to recover the cost of all the works – making good everything so that the car is in the condition that it would have been in had the replacement windscreen been properly fitted. I wonder who fitted the replacement windscreen? I think I would be out to sue them as well. Post the draft of your letter to the dealership and also to the finance company here so that we can have a look before you send it off. Incidentally to answer your question about what should you do immediately,  I would suggest that you send the letter tomorrow. Wait until the end of the week. If they don't respond or if they respond negatively, then write to them immediately and tell them that you are not prepared to do without the vehicle. As they have failed to respond to your putting work in hand and you will be approaching them for the costs of all the repairs and if they cause you any difficulty in you will simply sue them. A bill of about £4000 is easy. It puts you within the small claims track so there is no risk of costs even if you lose – which is most unlikely on the basis of what you say
    • Thanks I have been reading quite a few this one got me as it did say they have instructed them to take legal action but thanks again your a legend 
    • Yes we will be emailing them. We have kept a log of all conversations with everyone involved and backed up conversations with emails 👍
    • 'they' dont send court letters. only a sheriffs court can do that if the debt OWNER is brave enough to request they raise a court claim......... unlike E&W the scottish legal system is far more geared toward empowering the consumer and always put claimants to strict 1000% proof they are the legal owner of a debt, are legally due payment and hold the all the correct enforceable paperwork. just read a few Nolan SPC threads... dx  
  • 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

Robdblynd v Abbey ***WON***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6125 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

T,

 

I've been off reading your thread;) haven't you heard anything more from them since the 60% offer?...............:confused: :confused:

All advice offered here is my opinion only based on what I would do in a given situation. If you wish to act on it you do so at your own discretion

......................................................

I have no legal expertise or qualification, and give advice on the basis of my own experience and nothing else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 281
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Nope, she took 10 days to respond to the first email, but come Tuesday she's getting an email and a fax that says, 'Offer rescinded at close of business today, see you in court'. And by doing that I increase the amount they have to pay by nearly £500.

 

Mind you, she might have a bit of a hangover this weekend, did you read the reply GaryH prepared for Conncat after Inga accused her of mismanaging her account? It's a belter, so much so I've saved it, you never know when it will come in handy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He called Inga's comments "Derogatory, ill-informed and offensive" :) :)

 

Harsh but fair;)

All advice offered here is my opinion only based on what I would do in a given situation. If you wish to act on it you do so at your own discretion

......................................................

I have no legal expertise or qualification, and give advice on the basis of my own experience and nothing else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My thoughts exactly. But I bet they don't like it when we come back at them with things like that. It's ok for them to insult us but we should accept that, after all, they THE BANK and a law unto themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Mismanagement" implies we have got ourselves into this situation by our own excesses, not by the bank charging exorbitant penalties. And their only answer is to increase our overdraft so they can charge us yet more.

 

 

I really think I'm going to join a credit union

All advice offered here is my opinion only based on what I would do in a given situation. If you wish to act on it you do so at your own discretion

......................................................

I have no legal expertise or qualification, and give advice on the basis of my own experience and nothing else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, trousers done.

 

Credit Union, as far as I know is like a neighbourhood savings club. You put so much a week away and then when you need money to pay a bill you can draw it out again.

 

That right Cf?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, more or les.............I think they started in areas of deprivation where people weren't able to get access to conventional financial systems because of poor credit rating, low incomes etc. Now they've evolved into set-ups which offer everything a Bank does such as DD's , but they're still owned and run for the benefit of the people who pay into it.

 

The people who run them all have a shared interest, either where they all live, or their job........................I'm sure there's one for the Trade Union Unison, which is for people in lower-paid public sector jobs, so I'm going to investigate a bit more:)

All advice offered here is my opinion only based on what I would do in a given situation. If you wish to act on it you do so at your own discretion

......................................................

I have no legal expertise or qualification, and give advice on the basis of my own experience and nothing else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ABCUL

 

It's not quite what I was hoping for, but interesting anyway

All advice offered here is my opinion only based on what I would do in a given situation. If you wish to act on it you do so at your own discretion

......................................................

I have no legal expertise or qualification, and give advice on the basis of my own experience and nothing else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Association of British Credit Unions..............you asked, so i went looking and found this:)

All advice offered here is my opinion only based on what I would do in a given situation. If you wish to act on it you do so at your own discretion

......................................................

I have no legal expertise or qualification, and give advice on the basis of my own experience and nothing else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep do you pay your wages in or whatxxkia

 

Well, that's what I had hoped they were, but as far as I can tell you make fixed payments in each week/month and then get good interest rates or cheap guaranteed loans

All advice offered here is my opinion only based on what I would do in a given situation. If you wish to act on it you do so at your own discretion

......................................................

I have no legal expertise or qualification, and give advice on the basis of my own experience and nothing else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got the order from the court today, dated 25/05/07.

 

Case Management Conference on 28/06/07 at 10.30am.

 

Says all the usual stuff about all the cases listed (147 of them) being similar and therefore one CMC. They expect many of the cases to have been settled prior to this date therefore allocated half a day. CPR 59 applies. CMI sheet no later than 7 days before hearing. Then the odd bit, last paragraph says;

 

"The judge has asked me to point out that amongst the directions that may be given or considered is the allocation of the cases to the multi-track (in accordance with CPR 59) but also it may be appropriate to consider orders for consolidation and directions aimed at selecting which is the most appropriate lead, sample or test case.

Consideration may also be given to whether it is appropriate to treat this as Group Litigation to which the provisions of CPR Part 19 apply."

 

So it looks like it's CMI sheet tonight, email Inga for her comments and pray I'm not the test case but prepare just in case I am. :|

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi tricia, im still reading yr thread and not one bit of it makes a damn bit of sense to me, but just wanted to say good luck!!!

from the sounds of it you've put 200% into it and u deserve it all back!!!

 

i just hope i dont get that far cos talking on here wont help me, i'll b ringing u all up!!!

ps....... i finally got to sleep at 1.45 am cos i couldnt stop laughing at what u wrote, u made all of our week!!!

 

c u later??? (have a break from the p/work and come and make us all happy)!! :p :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be there. And as for going to court, if you get that far you can get one of us to be a court buddy for you.

 

You will not get into court, I can practically gaurantee that. If you do, I'll wear the see through trousers, how about that??? ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

i was thinking "bring it on" then (going 2 court with u in CF's c'thru's) but then came 2 my senses!!!! :D

 

thanx 4 the offer tho, just yr phone numbers will suffice 4 now (i think)??? o/wise i'll b driving up 2 yr place and bringing u down here!!! (as long as u dont mind 4 cats and a rabbit that doesnt stop poooing) :eek:

 

i hope i never have to find out what all this legal jargon means!!

xxxxxxxxxxx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got the order from the court today, dated 25/05/07.

 

Case Management Conference on 28/06/07 at 10.30am.

 

Says all the usual stuff about all the cases listed (147 of them) being similar and therefore one CMC. They expect many of the cases to have been settled prior to this date therefore allocated half a day. CPR 59 applies. CMI sheet no later than 7 days before hearing. Then the odd bit, last paragraph says;

 

"The judge has asked me to point out that amongst the directions that may be given or considered is the allocation of the cases to the multi-track (in accordance with CPR 59) but also it may be appropriate to consider orders for consolidation and directions aimed at selecting which is the most appropriate lead, sample or test case.

Consideration may also be given to whether it is appropriate to treat this as Group Litigation to which the provisions of CPR Part 19 apply."

 

So it looks like it's CMI sheet tonight, email Inga for her comments and pray I'm not the test case but prepare just in case I am. :|

 

Hi Tricia

Lets hope that Abbey settle before court, as judges are now getting very sick of the situation and they now want a case to go to the court of appeal.

 

My O/H herard on Radio 4 to day that Judge Stephen Gerlis has spoken out on behalf of all London Judges that they want a case to go to the court of appeal. Now this Judge is one of our Judges at our local court, so this is very worrying for us! as we currently have 3 cases there at present. What's even more worrying is that I knew him from years & years ago we were in the same crowd when I was single and he was at that time just qualified as a soliciter and also he also worked with my o/h's cousin.

 

Regards

DS

 

ps have you got your T&c's for Abbey!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...