Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

goodwill gesture


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6214 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

i havent been with the bank long so my statements were online so i just went ahead with requesting the charges 1st letter i got from them was a refusal, then i sent the one stating if i didnt recieve a satisfactory response i would take them to court and i recieved the goodwill gesture today

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Similar query for me.

I've submitted MCOL, and have received a letter from A and L, enclosing cheque for £370 (claim is for £1,500) being the difference between £36 charges, and £12 charges used by credit card firms. They have given me the option to refuse, but wondered what I need to do after refusing? Anyone have any advice?

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rip the cheque into 2 pieces and send back with a rejection letter :

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/25716-rejecting-offers.html

 

Then continue with your timetable of dates, if you are at MCOL stage they should pay up soon.If they have acknowledged your claim they have 33 days from the date it was issued to file a defence otherwise you can apply for judgement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks!

Further update: I've had a letter from Wragge & Co today, with an acknowledgement of service saying they intend to defend. I assume this is a delaying tactic to buy more time. Seems odd so soon after the partial offer!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep they have issued lots of these letters I think they did a bulk post out yesterday as about 6 people on here have received the same letter.

So basically they have 33 days from when your claim was issued to either pay up or put in a defence otherwise you can file for judgement

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is interesting that they are now adopting the £12 charge, considering they started off by saying that this was the OFT recommendations for Credit cards. Shows a complete lack of continuity in their stance and that they are all over the shop. They are really trying everything to stop the flood and none of it is working.

Stick to your guns lindsay and accept nothing less than the full amount. A&L are complete mugs if they are now sending their litigation to an outside firm because its costing them more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...