Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • T911, Nick, thanks, I got there in the end! Without boring you with the details, it is precisely the most ridiculous cases that end up being lost - because the Cagger knows the other party's case is rubbish so doesn't do the necessary work on their own case. G24 are well aware of double dipping.  They have either done it deliberately or else have cameras which can't handle multiple visits to the car park which G24 happily leave malfunctioning so the £££££ keep rolling in. Sadly most people aren't like you.  I've just read various reviews for the Retail Park on TripAdvisor and Parkopedia.  Virtually all of them are complaining about these unfair charges for daring to spend time & money shopping in a shopping centre.  Yet no-one is refusing to pay.  They moan but think they have been fined and cough up. G24 are unlikely to do court, but it's not impossible with two tickets. Try to get evidence that you were elsewhere at these times. Often retail parks will intervene, but I've Googled & Googled and cannot find an e-mail address for the place.  Could the manager of one of your favourite shops give you a contact e-mail address for the company that run the retail park? Right at the moment I'm supposed to be teaching someone who runs two shops at the local shopping centre, but I'm not as he has had to go to a meeting with the company that runs the shopping centre, so I know for a fact that these business relationships exist!!!
    • Afternoon DX, The files were in date order. How would I put them into an acceptable format? I'm not that pc literate.  
    • I think you need to tell us what actually happened. Your original post gives the impression that you were taken to court for a speeding offence. But you go on to say that you received no paperwork. So you could not have been summonsed for a speeding offence because the police had no evidence that you (or anybody else) was driving (and it seems you were not anyway). You were probably summonsed (or more likely received a Single Justice Procedure Notice) for "failing to provide the driver's details." You would not normally be banned for this offence if you were convicted - it carries six points. So did you have any earlier points which meant you were liable to a "totting up" ban?  If you were originally convicted (as it seems you might have been) how was that conviction set aside? Did you perform a Statutory Declaration? There is simply too much missing for any meaningful help to be given. It seems as if there may have been an error by the DVLA but before you consider suing those idiots until the cows come home, you need to explain exactly what has happened.  
    • Point 4 and 10 duplicate Point 5 and 8 duplicate  Try to keep to one para with regards the agreement...various paras duplicating the same. Statement of truth is out of date refer to the claimants statement    
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6239 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, Please can anyone advise me on my Insurance Claim, details below;

 

I have a claim running with the Nationwide.

My Television (Philips 32PW9763) brought about 8 years ago cost me £2,000 at the time.

This was an all singing all dancing model, with splitscreen picture in picture, dual tuners

9 speaker, not including the build in subwoofer. Amazing picture and sound.

 

During a lighting storm the TV, stopped working.

 

When I put the claim in with letter from Engineer confirming the unit was unrepairable.

 

They first said that my television was CRT, and the nearest suitable item was a JVC LCD

Television worth £300 approx.

 

I was not happy with this, and asked him how he thought this was match for mines.

 

Then when he checked the specs and found it didn't have all the feature mines had,

he then found a Philips Television (32PF****) which was approx £500.

 

When I took the spec for this and found that it didn't have all the features either.

He found another model (32PF9731) which was £765 plus VAT.

He or Empire Direct (they company they use to replace items) didn't have a clue about my Television, and I was getting frustrated that they were finding a replacement without even knowing what feature mines had.

 

So the person at Nationwide then told me to find one I thought had all the features of my previous one

and they would see.

 

I found a model which has all those feature it is Phillips 32PF9830 rrp approx £2000

They are saying that this model is an upgrade to the one I had, and offering me the Philips 32PF9731 £765 model.

 

Now when I try to find someone technical (e.g. philips consumer line) who can confirm this, they don't seem to know about the models.

Speaking to some friends they say that the model they are offering is a downgrade to the one I had.

 

I have argued this point with them, but they insist that is their final offer, and that I should write to Churchill, which I don't see why since it is Nationwide who I am paying and are dealing with the claim.

 

The key here seems to be that mines had a dual tuner for the split screen. and they one they are offering doesn't.

Any advice on this would be very helpful.

Thanks :???:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Print off all the specification from the damaged TV - the Philips 32PW9763, print off the specifications with the TV they are offering to replace - Philips 32PF9731 .

 

Highlight the features your old TV has, which the replacement has not, and write to Churchill advising this is not a like for like replacement due to the highlights. remind them that you consider a Phillips 32PF9830 to be of equivalent.

 

Good Luck, although looking at the specs I suspect they may ask you to contribute towards it, as it does seem betterment.

 

Regards

Abbey - owed £3260 - Paid up.

 

Barclays owed £2500 - Paid up.

 

Halifax, Mint & Egg - next on the hit list

 

Dont click on the scales - I'm quite proud of my little red dot! - As the little red dot has gone - click away!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest TractorGirl

Madagascar

 

Remember your insurance covers you for new for old and of similar spec- refer to your policy wording. Underwriters can offer you lower spec if it is within reason, same way they can offer you a better spec at their discretion (very unlikely) but it depends on individual underwriting criteria.

 

Even though Nationwide are your Insurers, Churchill are the Underwriters and your claim is being dealt with by Churchill employees......Nationwide is just the branding.

 

Good luck

 

TG

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...