Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • 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

Maplin Electronics - Product not as Advertised Plus..


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6143 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

Customer Services Manager

Maplin Electronics Ltd

Valley Road

Wombwell

Barnsley

S73 0BS

 

 

COMPLAINT

 

 

I am writing to you to complain about recent service I have received from your company.

I Placed an order for one off Pro Sound L60AW Tie Clip Radio Mic system online on 29/06/07, It was not clear until I received my order acknowledgement Email that in fact this Item was out of stock and that would not be available for around 28 Days.

I Contacted your Aberdeen Branch ( Your Closest Branch to Dundee) on Friday 6Th July to check if they had this item in stock. They Informed me that they had 2 of these in stock

I contact your Customer services department on 0870 429 6000 the same afternoon to see if it was possible for me to collect one of these Items from the Aberdeen Branch as I required it for a Function on Sunday 8th July. Your Customer advisor advised me that this would not be a problem and told me when I arrived at the store to collect the item to ask the store to contact Customer Services and they would issue a credit to the Aberdeen store and I would be able to take the Item away with me. This sounded a reasonable solution to me. Since my requirement to obtain the item had changed since I initially placed the order with the late booking of a wedding function which I required the Additional Tie Clip Radio Mic for the Minister to use so that the full service could be clearly heard and recorded.

When I arrived at your Aberdeen Store I spoke to Ewan regarding what I had discussed with Customer Services, Ewan then went off to discuss this with the store Manager, and when he returned stated that he would contact Customer Services. After some time of Ewan trying to find a telephone number for Customer Services I gave him the Number from the rear of my Order Advice Note.

When Ewan contacted Customer Services he was told that nothing could be done regarding any credit until Monday. Ewan then asked me to call back at the store on Monday. I of course told him that this defeated the whole Purpose of me making the 3 hour round trip Journey from Dundee to collect the item. Ewan then told me there was nothing else he could do to rectify the situation.

I then contacted Customer Services myself regarding this and was even more annoyed when I was told that the actual order had been cancelled, but there was no record on the account as to which customer service advisor had cancelled the order. I was then again told that the Credit would not drop (whatever that means) until Monday and there was nothing Customer Services could do about it. I asked for confirmation that the credit was being paid back to my credit card and was told yes, that was what would happen on Monday.

I then thought at least we have a solution now, and I then went back into the store and went to Purchase the item. Again it was Ewan that I dealt with, I initially checked as soon as I arrived in store that they did in fact have 2 of these items, an assistant checked the computer and confirmed that there were 2 showing as being in stock

When Ewan went to get the item from the store he returned and said he could not find them and that the only one they had must be the one on display and he would find the box etc for it ( I may add that this took around 20 Minutes in total). When he eventually returned with the Box I noticed that it was not a Pro Sound item but a system made by Chiayo (Model R-1001) a manufacturer that I have never heard of. The Receiver unit looked nothing like the Pro Sound L59AW system receiver unit that i had previously Purchased from your Aberdeen Store some months ago. Also when checking the contents of the box there was no Headset Microphone in the pack, Ewan then told me the item only came with the Tie Clip Microphone.[/font]

The Specification for this Item clearly states the following :-,

Tie-Clip Radio Microphone System (L60AW)

 

Manufacturer: ProSound

 

High quality VHF radio microphone system ideal for anyone wanting to create a wireless set up

Ideal for schools, small clubs, pubs etc

Crystal-clear sound transmission

Supplied with belt pack transmitter, tie-clip microphone, headset microphone XLR mic lead, receiver, &quarter;inch jack connecting lead and plug in mains power supply

Low battery consumption

License-free

Operates on 174.1MHz

Both microphones run on PP3 9V batteries (sold separately)

 

The kit transmits on 173.80MHz and 175.00MHz which means it may be used in conjunction with both the L58AW handheld radio mic kit and L59AW twin handheld radio mic kit with all four mics running simultaneously. Note: This radio mic system is not compatible with any other radio mic system, even if it operates on the same frequency

As you may understand I was not at all impressed with Maplins at this point.

As a Chiavo R-1001 is not a ProSound L59AW Tie Clip mic system and also did not contain the headset Mic as advertised ,nor ordered the following will apply.

 

Under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 traders must sell goods that are as described and of satisfactory quality. Clearly the above item does not match the description.

13. Sale by description

Where there is a contract for the sale of goods by description, there is an implied term that the goods will correspond with the description.

 

This is a matter I will be taking up with my Local Trading Standards at the earliest opportunity.

As I have been a long term Customer of Maplins I feel that on this occasion your company have let me down badly with Poor Customer Service, Untrue product description and a lot of my time and expense.

 

I look forward to your Prompt response to my complaint, which may in some way help to restore my faith and custom with Maplins as a company. With today’s experience I can assure that I have lost all faith in your company.

Ian Reid

Lloyds TSB -PPI - Full refund . 05/09/06 :D:p (As Seen on TV) :p

Halifax settled in Full.. :D 22/09/06

TSB First Claim SETTLED IN FULL 19/10/06 :D

Second Claim to Lloyds TSB - Settled in Full

Firstplus - early settlement interest charges - Challenged the use of the rule of 78 - SETTLED IN FULL 12/1/07

PPI - GE Money / Purpleloans / Firstplus - Now Settled after 1 year long hard fight.

 

 

 

If my post has helped you, please click the scales! :grin:

 

Anything said is my opinion and how I understand the law, always consult professional legal advice before taking something to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just did Bookie,

 

Its Microsoft Office 2007, Disnae like Cut N Paste for some reason..

 

Can you also please edit the quote in your above to remove my Contact details Please..

 

Thanks

 

Ian

Lloyds TSB -PPI - Full refund . 05/09/06 :D:p (As Seen on TV) :p

Halifax settled in Full.. :D 22/09/06

TSB First Claim SETTLED IN FULL 19/10/06 :D

Second Claim to Lloyds TSB - Settled in Full

Firstplus - early settlement interest charges - Challenged the use of the rule of 78 - SETTLED IN FULL 12/1/07

PPI - GE Money / Purpleloans / Firstplus - Now Settled after 1 year long hard fight.

 

 

 

If my post has helped you, please click the scales! :grin:

 

Anything said is my opinion and how I understand the law, always consult professional legal advice before taking something to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, the problem I see with your letter is that it is a letter of complaint, yes, but you do not state what you would like to achieve with it. I would suggest that you state what you would like to see done to resolve the matter to your satisfation, whether be an apology, compensation, or whatever it is you think appropriate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is generally a good idea to state that you want appropriate remedial action so that you are not limiting yourself to what you can get (so, don't just say you want a repair or a replacement, as the company may offer a refund if that would be desirable).

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is one confusing letter!

 

On the first line you state:

"I Placed an order for one off Pro Sound L60AW Tie Clip Radio Mic system"

Than later state:

"when checking the contents of the box there was no Headset Microphone in the pack, Ewan then told me the item only came with the Tie Clip Microphone"

 

I guess that was a typo on the first line and should have said "headset"....anyway it seems that you have inspected the offered alternative product (Chiayo), decided it was unsuitable and then accepted it anyway?

 

Thats hardly Maplin's fault is it!! and its not really unreasonable for them to be out of stock.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Matt,

Maybe a bit confussing, the system was a Tie Clip Mic System which also Included a Headset Microphone, 2 Microphones and 1 Transmitter.

 

I never accepted the Item, It was originally ordered online as my Nearest Maplin store is an Hour and a Half drive from Dundee, As the Item was needed quickly it was arranged that I collected one from the Aberdeen Store who had 2 of these in stock,rather than wait until the came back in stock at the warehouse.

 

As for being out of stock , I was not advised it was out of stock until after the order had been placed, The fact that I had to wait was not a real problem until we got a last minute function on Sunday.

 

Ian

Lloyds TSB -PPI - Full refund . 05/09/06 :D:p (As Seen on TV) :p

Halifax settled in Full.. :D 22/09/06

TSB First Claim SETTLED IN FULL 19/10/06 :D

Second Claim to Lloyds TSB - Settled in Full

Firstplus - early settlement interest charges - Challenged the use of the rule of 78 - SETTLED IN FULL 12/1/07

PPI - GE Money / Purpleloans / Firstplus - Now Settled after 1 year long hard fight.

 

 

 

If my post has helped you, please click the scales! :grin:

 

Anything said is my opinion and how I understand the law, always consult professional legal advice before taking something to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...