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

Clydesdale Pay 50% Out But Defending Rest


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6246 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

Hi All

my big mate has just had a letter from clydesdale telling him that they will be defending in court next week.He had claimed for £1298,last december they payed him out half that amount,he accepted as was the advice on this site at the time,but sent a letter to them saying he would accept this but intended to sue for the rest.

 

The bank, in this new letter are saying that since he accepted this cheque he accepted full and final settlement.Now hes in a panic and has court looming.The clydesdale say they will defend,

 

next week 22nd march,and needs help big time.Anyone up for a visit with him

to Glasgow Sherrif would be most welcome

 

mikeb

Link to post
Share on other sites

you need to be clear if this IS a claim within scotish law or if it is a claim within english law from scotland.

i take it as read, hence involving the sherrif that its scottish & as its in the scotland group?

if so this is limited to £750 per claim

 

and again, interms of his acceptance letter, did he clearly state it was accepted as a partial settlement only?

 

a quick read of a few relevent threads should answer most queries, as this is a self-help forum.

 

dx100uk:-D

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

dx

 

In answer to your question,yes hes a scot living in Scotland,and as we are aware you can claim £1500 in Scotland.

 

The thing is he sent the second letter (LBA) to clydesdale asking for money

back, they paid him half of the £1298,he has told the court this so technically he is only suing for £649.

 

And again yes to the question, he clearly stated in his letter to the bank when they paid the half that he would accept it as part payment but was suing for the rest.

 

I appreciate this is a self help site but hes at court next week and works nights so any help very much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

mikeb1 hi there the CB are a tricky bunch and it sounds like they will indeed claim that your big mate accepted their offer as full and final settlement, the advice was to write back stating REFUSAL OF OFFER but acceptance as partial offer, then to wait for their reply which is always

WE ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR REFUSAL OF OUR OFFER AND REITERATE THAT ENCASHMENT OF THE CHEQUE WILL BE SEEN AS FULL AND FINAL SETTLEMENT. I am not saying this would be the view of the judge though but will almost certainly be the basis of their defence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you need to be clear if this IS a claim within scotish law or if it is a claim within english law from scotland.

i take it as read, hence involving the sherrif that its scottish & as its in the scotland group?

 

I think it is blatently obvious seeing as the thread is in the scotland forum and the court mentioned is Glasgow sheriff.

 

a quick read of a few relevent threads should answer most queries, as this is a self-help forum.

 

dx100uk:grin:

 

This is indeed a self help forum, but by definition, this forum is a place for citing discussion. I find comments like this dismissive and unhelpful, and are the type of responses which get my back up. The old saying "If you don't have anything constructive to add.... Don't add anything!!" comes to mind

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...