Announcements
-
-
Tweets
-
Posts
-
By Unknown2024 · Posted
Then it shouldn't have been marked on the agreement at all and the rrp of the car should have just been 7k lower then -
By Unknown2024 · Posted
No I get what you're saying and that is fair enough if that's the way it is, but the issue is that the Judge has agreed that I part exchanged my car against a new car but then failed to acknowledge that it was a deposit of some form. To trade my car in and get a discount of a new car constitutes as a deposit by legislation. The Judge has conflicted himself and this is where he is misinterpreting the law. I also shouldn't have had a scrappage discount and a dealership discount together, it says so in their terms and conditions, which in itself makes the agreement improperly executed at the very least. This may all make more sense when I upload the trial bundle, it's over 160 pages though so taking a while to redact my information -
the scrappage scheme is nothing to do with the agreement ...sorry. it's an enticement to purchase a replacement vehicle. just the same as shop signs that say 50% off or whatever. its a done and dusted deal done before you enter into the agreement for the remaining £sum. -
don't get too hung up on the real meaning of 'fake' in terms of the documents a claimant might produce relating to a potential court claim. by fake we typically mean, they are not obviously the 'real McCoy' ,100% associated with whatever credit they are trying to pin on punters. they are often of the right 'version' that an OC would have used for that particular take out date, but with details inserted in a diff font where they should be for say your name address DOB etc. All DCA's typically have filing cabinets covering each year for most creditor, whip 'em out, scan and copy n paste your details onto them, even easier now with online sign ups. no hard copies ever sent cause 90% of mugs have lost them..... one of our most powerful tools is the fact any docs they produce, unless they state they are 'a reconstruction' MUST come from the original creditor noty some hidden pile the claimants have. Link are absolute masters at this so dont stick to lowell threads. dx
-
Driving home last night I contacted wing mirrors with a car coming the opposite way. The wing mirror folded in and the glass popped out. Very minor damage. I stopped at the next layby (A road) to repair the mirror. A passerby stopped and said they saw the other car stopped behind me in another layby - they went back and passed over details so we could get in touch. The conversation started cordially, but quickly got heated when I said I was well on my side and they drifted over (which is what happened). I wasn't going to bother filing a claim as there isn't enough damage to justify it. I've said to the other party lets just call it quits as there are no witnesses and we both think we are innocent. they said they are contacting the police and insurance and that they have witnesses. But a quick facebook search found a post by the other person saying they were in a crash, and were 'spun' off the road. Picture of a broken wing mirror and a slight scuff on the front and rear wheel arch. they are asking for witnesses. I have screenshots of the post, and sent them another message saying I can see you don't have witnesses as you are appealing for them. I'd really not drag this out. Lets call it quits and move on. this was followed by a couple of messages that didn't really make much sense. e.g. 'do the right thing'. What should I do now? Contact police? Contact my insurance? - Can I tell them about this incident but say I dont want to claim? Will that affect my premium?
-
-
Recommended Topics
-
-
Our picks
-
If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,
If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.-
- 1 reply
-
-
Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld
ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,
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
-
-
A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report
WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,
Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299-
- 161 replies
-
-
Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available
BankFodder posted a post in a topic,
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
-
-
-
Recommended Topics
-
style="text-align: center;">
Thread Locked
because no one has posted on it for the last 5928 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
-
Recently Browsing 0 Caggers
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Have we helped you ...?
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS
Recommended Posts