Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well we can't predict what the judge will believe. PE will say that they responded in the deadline and you will say they don't. Nobody can tell what a random DJ will decide. However if you go for an OOC settlement you should still be able to get some money
    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else 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

sumbody help me!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6139 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

having looked through these threads, i realise that im seeing the name of 3 mobile a few too many times. i wish id seen this earlier and id never signed up with them.

i to cut a very long, dreary, and somewhat exhausting story short, i purchased a 3 contract 35 quid a month in january via an independant company, dunno if im allowed to say the name or not. they promised me chashback so id pay virtually nothing, by the 4rth month.

turns out the company stopped taking any of my phone calls, or responding, when the time came to cough up my money, and now i can no longer afford the contract! ive tried numerous times, phoning 3 as well the company but its like talking to a blank wall. they will n ot cancel my contract! ive cancelled my direct debit to them as well, n ive told em ill see em in court!

now ive got two questions!

1)who is my contract actually with? 3 or the company i brought it from?

2)do i have a chance in court if i only made a contract with an independant company and as they have not honoured their end of the contract, i dont need to honour mine?

what shall i do?

help me, coz to be honest, i NEVA wann have to talk to them customer service ppl again!

Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Your network contract is with 3. It is 3 that is providing you with a service, and you are paying 3.

2) You almost certainly have a contract with 3. The fact that you also had an agreement with a separate company regarding cashback is almost certainly irrelevant, and you still have to continue to pay 3. If you do not pay 3, you will probably find that they will disconnect you and pursue you for the full remaining line rental of your contract, and you will damage your credit rating.

 

If the company you had your cashback deal with is still in business, you may be able to pursue them for the sum owed to you through the courts. However, this will not be instantaneous.

 

Some people have had some success getting 3 to reduce their line rental bills, having explained that they are unable to pay. See numerous other threads in this forum.

 

Never enter a mobile phone contract you can't afford.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate you'd be better informed if you joined this forum BEFORE you signed up - but it's unfair to complain about 3UK, the problem you describe in not under the control of ANY network, and failing cashback schemes (which are very much like pyramid schemes in a way) were so common - are less so now as people are more knowledgeable about how volatile these dealer promises can be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pursue the cashback company, pm me their name if you cant get a hold of them i can usually find a lot of information about a company and may be able to assist. It does seem there are a lot of things like this going on

Link to post
Share on other sites

buzby, in fairness 3 seem to be particularly guilty of letting any sheister set up as a reseller. i'm sure i've heard that they're clamping down a bit, which can only be a good thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem for 3UK, is the contract and deal have been set up correctly. It is because the 'cashback' scheme is underwritten by the dealer and not the network that the problems arise. They are using the dealers commission to pay for the cashback, and if this doesn't materialise as the dealer expects, the customer is left standing as the dealer goes to the wall. No network has been immune from this and 3UK now has onerous conditions in place for their retailers to stop this happening. Yes, they have chucked out dealers who have tried to con the public, so they've done what they can. The T&C regulating the situation are those of the network, which won;t refer to the cashback as the promotion had nothing to do with them.

 

The answer is to explain to 3UK the situation and their standard response is to allow a tariff modification that will cut down the monthly spend to help the consumer caught in this trap. If the dealer is no longer a 3UK agency, this will be a slam-dunk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BASH.COM LTD

126A UPTON LANE

LONDON

E7 9LW

Company No. 05639881

 

Looks as though the company is being wound up (closing)

I dont think you will get much luck getting anything from them. I will look for more

 

Ok the company look to be doomed, i found another company who are linked to them in some way, they may be able to provide more info

 

Talk2 Sales Marketing

 

I will keep looking

Told you it was bad

4.22(SC) - Notice of constitution/continuance of liquidation/creditors committee12/03/20064.22(SC)

 

http://www.creditgate.com/companysearch/BASH.COM+LTD.aspx

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

hey, im somewhat happy to say that after months of sending letters to 3, and asking them to deal with my solicitor, 3 came to a compromise saying that theyd give me credit on my account and reduce my line rental. i was very happy and accepted it! but a coupla days later, they turned around and sed that in order to reduce the line rental, id have to carry out an xtra 6 months on my contract, so in total, 24 months with them altogether! just wanted to know if they are allowed to turn back on their word after everyfing was settled?!

dont worry, though cos im thinking of accepting their renewed offer, and the sooner i get away from 3, the better!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The sneaky bar stewards! This contract extension is NOT ON! Your agreement was based on the details discussed at the time. Their subsequent revised offer disadvantages you, and you don't (indeed shouldn't) have to accept it. Of course, you could argue if they are locking you in for another 6 months, you'd want and expect a new handset in compensation for their enforced additional lock-in period. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...