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

Universal Credit Loan CCJ - Now Paragon - Paid 19k Still owe 6k


spuddly
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5352 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

  • 2 months later...
  • Replies 183
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

update...

 

halifax loan agreed to £152 F&F

sent cheque for £152...Paid:D

 

halifax overdraft agreed £190 F&F

Ofered to pay in 2 instalments accepted 1st cheque £95 sent:)

 

no responce as yet from customer solutions.:confused:

Not too bad a result so far

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies

 

I wasntb aware you had sent both letters. They have failed to respond to both your CCA request so are now seriously in default.

 

The SAR request has not been complied with either although they have 40 days in which to do so. You sent the correct fees, what they chose to do with the money is up to them. As they are now in default of your CCA you do not need to pay them. Ask them for a copy of their official complaints procedure and we will take it from there

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
sundrydebits.jpg

 

what are sundry debits:confused: ?? when i sent for the sar request all i got back was another set of statements THATS IT!!

no explaination of sundry debits :confused:

 

they come to £200

 

and on the paragon statements they say i still owe them £250.63:mad:

spuddly:)

I would imagine these are Parasites charges for interest or sending out the threatomatic letters. You could always ask them in the same letter in which tou tell them the bumph they sent you is not an SAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

spoke to Trading standards and they suggest writing a letter to ask what sundry debits are so i put this together for them to chew on .

 

Paragon personal finance

ST CATHERINES COURT

HERBERT ROAD

SOLIHULL

WEST MIDLANDS

B91 3QE

Dear Sir/Madam

 

ACCOUNT NUMBER Re

 

This account is still in dispute and I do not acknowledge any debt to you or anyone you purport to represent

 

Thank you for your letter dated 3/07/07 the contents which have been noted.

I have sought advice from Trading Standards and after going over the statements of the account opened 18/02/2001 I have noted that you have applied sundry debits to the account and they total £200 which is more than the original amount when I joined the Debt management programme which at the time was £138.00 (26/02/2002).Could you please justify these charges. as they appear to have been unlawfuuly applied

As I have never received a copy of the agreement until 18/07/07 and no terms and conditions I do not acknowledge these charges and require them to be refunded in full.Therefore you have not complied with my request for an executed agreement under CCA 1974

I had already paid an upfront fee interest of £25.28 according to the statements sent no interest was applied until 2003.

May I remind you that you returned my subject access request cheque for £10 as it did not apply to this account, therefore you have no correspondence in relation to this account other than the alleged credit agreement.I stiil require details 0f ALL DATA held by you including telphone calls, computer records, written transcripts and any verbal discussion or manual intervention[/quote]

 

 

JUst acouple of additions you may want to make against Parasite

  • Haha 1

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...