Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
  • 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

Letter to the Manager. Is this OK?


cdb
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6156 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

Any advice on this letter/suggestions are welcome. Or is it OK as is?

 

Dear Sir,

 

Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended)

 

I purchased a Philips 37” Plasma television from your store on 16th Feb 2005 at a cost of £1283.99. The Television has now ceased to work. I’ve had an independent TV engineer inspect the TV for the fault and he has traced it down to screen level, requiring replacement of the plasma panel at a cost of £646.25 including VAT and labour. Having owned the TV for only 28 months, I can not say I am impressed. The engineer did inform me that the TV was made in week43 of 2003, so I am wondering how long it had been in your shop before I bought it.

 

The Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) states in section 14 paragraph 2B:

 

For the purposes of this Act, the quality of goods includes their state and condition and the following (among others) are in appropriate cases aspects of the quality of goods—

 

(a) fitness for all the purposes for which goods of the kind in question are commonly supplied,

(b) appearance and finish,

© freedom from minor defects,

(d) safety, and

(e) durability.

 

I am claiming with respect to (e) Durability.

 

The item as sold to me has not proved durable. I have two other televisions in my house, one is almost 20years old and the other is about 10years old. When I bought this TV I gave my father the old Philips 32” widescreen it replaced and that now is also 10years old.

I would expect a TV of this value to last at least a similar amount of time.

 

The action I would like you to take is simply to repair the TV to its former working self at no charge to myself.

 

I am quite happy for your engineers to take the TV away to be repaired.

 

In the event that the TV can not be repaired, I would expect a suitable replacement, taking into account the price and features of the TV.

 

I await your reply within the next 10days.

 

Please find enclosed copies of the engineers report and original receipt

 

Yours faithfully

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a personal nitpick, but after the salutation I would not mention SoGA - just start with the first line ("I purchased a Philips....").

 

Otherwise, I think the letter is spot on. Let us know how you get on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the amended letter I'm going to send, assuming noone adds anything before I post it.

 

I've just added another line pointing out the contract between me and comet, hoping they won't try and fob me off with Philips.

 

Dear Sir,

 

I purchased a Philips 37” Plasma television from your store on 16th Feb 2005 at a cost of £1283.99. The Television has now ceased to work. I’ve had an independent TV engineer inspect the TV for the fault and he has traced it down to screen level, requiring replacement of the plasma panel at a cost of £646.25 including VAT and labour. Having owned the TV for only 28 months, I can not say I am impressed. The engineer did inform me that the TV was made in week43 of 2003, so I am wondering how long it had been in your shop before I bought it.

 

Under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) I have a contract with yourselves.

 

The Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) states in section 14 paragraph 2B:

 

For the purposes of this Act, the quality of goods includes their state and condition and the following (among others) are in appropriate cases aspects of the quality of goods—

 

(a) fitness for all the purposes for which goods of the kind in question are commonly supplied,

(b) appearance and finish,

© freedom from minor defects,

(d) safety, and

(e) durability.

 

I am claiming with respect to (e) Durability.

 

The item as sold to me has not proved durable. I have two other televisions in my house, one is almost 20years old and the other is about 10years old. When I bought this TV I gave my father the old Philips 32” widescreen it replaced and that now is also 10years old. All three TVs are fully functioning and in daily use.

I would expect a TV of this value to last at least a similar amount of time.

 

The action I would like you to take is simply to repair the TV to its former working self at no charge to myself.

 

I am quite happy for your engineers to take the TV away to be repaired.

 

In the event that the TV can not be repaired, I would expect a suitable replacement, taking into account the price and features of the TV.

 

I await your reply within the next 10days.

 

Please find enclosed copies of the engineers report and original receipt

 

Yours faithfully

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would head the letter......... re;Sale of Goods act

 

Keep us posted:)

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

oops also noticed

Should not as amended be as ammended ?

If you do a google search tho it seems both are there !

You learn somethin every day !

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Amend" is the correct spelling ;)

The above post constitutes my personal opinion on the facts in the post compared with my personal knowledge of the applicable legislation. I make no guarantees of its legal accuracy. If you are in doubt seek advice of a legal professional specialising in the area concerned.

 

If my post has helped you please click my scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I got a reply today. The manager passed me straight on to the service centre.

The guy I spoke to there said I have 2 options.

One is to have it repaired, they work on a sliding scale from 18months to 3 years (recission I guess) and I would have 35% off the cost of the repair, so still alot of money (£300+)

The second option, If I understood it correctly. I pay them £75, admin or whatever and they provide me with a new product on a like for like basis.

 

No prizes for guessing which option I'm going for.

 

He said someone will ring me tomorrow and sort it out.

 

So fingers crossed this is pretty much sorted. I'll let you know if/when I have a shiney new telly on my living room wall.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had the Comet exchange people on the phone and they're giving me an exchange note (what ever they call it) to the full value of the origional TV.

Result!!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Expressit

Well done, just shows what they are prepared to do if you take the time to write a well constructed letter pointing out their obligations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

WELL DONE YOU !!! PROVING AGAIN THAT THE LITTLE PEOPLE CAN WIN bouncingsmilie33nk5wp.gif

=======================================================================================================

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

 

Halifax Won £1180.00

NatWest Won £876.00

Halifax 2 N1 submitted 20/07/07 stayed 24/08/07 N244 Application filed 31/08/07 hearing set for 12/11/07 rescheduled for 29/01/2008. Application dismissed stay still in place.

Charity Group £200 compo for lost passport.

HM revenue & Customs; demand for WTC overpayment £632.12. Disputed, their error. Did not have to repay.

All opinions expressed are my own and have no legal standing and no connection to CAG

 

All errors/typos etc are not my fault the blame lies with the spelling gremlins

 

<<<<<< If any of this has been helpful, PLEASE click my scales

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Justto update..........

 

I took my TV and accessories back to Comet yesterday and got a nice shiney new Toshiba 42" LCD in exchange. As well as a PS3, bluray r/c and hdmi lead all for an extra £110 over the cost of what Comet gave me to exchange my tell.

 

 

I didn't get a warrenty again. I'm in 2 minds. I've just proved you don't need one, but do I need the piece of mind that one gives.

 

Also the tight woman behind the counter wouldn't reduce the cost of the warrenty to match the new price of the TV. It should have cost £250 with the TV price matched to £870, but she said it goes against the origional price of the telly at £1199 and so will be £299:x

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...