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

Refusing to pay up for laptop


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6505 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

Hi,

 

I, yes stupidly and not for the first time, dropped my PC laptop, I rang the insurance company, they told me to get a quote from the local computer shop and send it to them. I asked if I could remove the hard disk to recover some docs/photos and they said ok.

 

I removed the drive and sent it to my mate who's a bit of a PC guru to see if he could get anything off it, as its not the first drive I've had go I fairly frequently backup my stuff so it was only a few recent Word docs and photos I was missing (though at the time I thought it was more!)

 

I took the laptop to the local computer shop, they kept it a few days and then gave me a quote, this cost me £15 and stated the laptop was 'beyond economical repair' as the screen was broken and they're the most expensive part, they mentioned the missing hard drive and I explained it was at a mates for data recovery.

 

Then I got a call from a 3rd party 'loss adjustor' (?), he quizzed me on everything from my broadband supplier to how the accident happened, where and when I bought the laptop. He virtually accused me of theft or dishonesty as I'd bought it 2nd hand and said he needed the laptop, the hard disk, CDs, cables and everything, I said the hard drive was removed and my mate was trying to get some data back for me, I also stated they had previously said this was ok. He said they MUST have the hard drive to proceed.

 

After this onslought of questionning, that I can only presume was to put me off or try and find a way out of paying up, I rang my mate and he said he'd had no success with the hard drive so he'd thrown it away, apologised for the inconvenience but said it was trashed and didn't think I'd want it back.

 

Now I'm a laptop and £15 down due to the incorrect advice and general obstinance of my insurers who offer a 'no quibble claims procedure guaranteeing a settlement within 2 days' hah!

 

Anyone got any recommendations?

 

DD

Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can suggest is that you write to them explaining the incorrect advice, the behaviour of the Loss Adjuster, and the catalogue of errors over the hard disk. Ask them if they will consider a claim and what steps you need to take to make the situation good.

 

I think you're a bit knackered to be honest but it's worth a go... and after all this is only my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont mean to be rude but what kind of "mate" throws a hard drive away working or not it was still your property had a mate of mine done that he wouldnt have been a mate much longer.

 

Especially as presumably the hard drive was still in its laptop enclosure??

 

If you still have the enclosure then you could always buy a dead one from enay and put it in not too sure how legal this would be though, personally you are probably on a hiding to nothing, under the circumstances I think this mate owes you a lot of pints down the pub :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not very legal.

 

I wouldn't do this, as the Insurance Company already know that the laptop hard drive had been thrown away. If it was "miraculously" found, they would carry out an inspection on the laptop, find that the hard drive wasn't the original, and cancel your insurance.

 

You will then find it hard to gain subsequent insurance.

 

I'm afraid you will have to put this one down to experience.

Abbey - owed £3260 - Paid up.

 

Barclays owed £2500 - Paid up.

 

Halifax, Mint & Egg - next on the hit list

 

Dont click on the scales - I'm quite proud of my little red dot! - As the little red dot has gone - click away!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where does he say the insurance know that the laptop hd has been thrown away???

 

I wasnt suggesting it as a good option but that it was likely the only way forward for his case even less likely if the HD caddy for that laptop was also binned.

 

I find it hard to believe that a m8 would do that esp if its in the caddy as you can stick a new drive in there

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

As an ex-claims advisor I would not consider the removal of the hard disk to have affected a claim - as long as the physical damage to the laptop is consistent with the circumstances and the policy providing cover for Personal Possessions/Accidental Damage then the claim should proceed. It is unreasonable for the insurance company to reject or leave the claim in abeyance because of what happened with the hard disk. At the end of the day, if the insurance company chose to inspect the laptop, it would not be appropriate for them to inspect the content of the hard disk due to data protection. Pursue the case and if you don't get anywhere refer the matter to the Financial Ombudsman Service. This is free.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also mention that before handing your laptop over to the loss adjuster you would be entitled to remove your hard disc to protect your privacy. Also at the very least to backup your data onto another disc So their argument is somewhat spurious

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...