Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Kanga v GM Card (HFC)


Kanga14869
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5583 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

Sent them a CCA request, to which they replied with an application form (with no prescribed terms whatsoever) and a covering letter (which contained prescribed terms), and some statements.

 

I immediately sent a dispute letter and they've just replied stating they don't agree its in dispute, and as the document has 'Consumer Credit Agreement regulated by etc etc' on it, and I've signed it, its legally binding.

 

  • Now I don't necessarily disagree that its binding, but I wouldn't think they have a cat in hells chance of it being enforceable.
  • Prescribed terms not within the four corners
  • The wording of the title is incorrect if they wish the application to be treated as an agreement.

Now I'm fairly sure that they know that they're wrong, and am guessing that trying to convince me that they're right is a bit naughty...

 

The million dollar question is... do I tell them and hope they go away, or keep my powder dry and see what they do next?

 

gmCCA036.jpg

 

gmcardcca.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Kanga, I would personally write to them again reiterating that the agreement is not enforceable for the reasons you have already outlined in your previous correspondence. The attached letter has often done the trick for me.

 

Dear Sir,

Further to your letter dated …... I reiterate, the documents provided in response to my CCA request were a follows: a pre contractual application form together with a covering letter.

 

I am pleased to see that you confirm this as a true copy of the original agreement executed by yourselves.

 

However, as you must realise this “agreement” does not conform to sections 60(1) and 61(1) of the Consumer credit Act and is therefore unenforceable under section 127(3) of the same act.

 

You entered into default of my request some time ago. Whilst the account is in dispute, you are not permitted to ask for any payment, nor am I obliged to offer any payment to you. Furthermore, whilst the dispute remains, you are not entitled to charge any interest on the account, make any further charges to the account or pass the account to anybody else.

 

Please note you may also consider this letter a statutory notice under Section 10 of the Data Protection Act to cease processing any data in relation to this account with immediate effect. This means you must remove all information regarding this account from your own internal records and from my records with any credit reference agencies including any defaults. Should you refuse to comply, you must within 21 days provide me with a detailed breakdown of your reasoning behind continuing to process my data. It is not sufficient to simply state that you have a ‘legal right’, you must outline your reasoning in this matter and state upon which legislation this reasoning depends.

 

Should you fail to respond within 21 days, I will expect that this means you agree to remove all such data.

 

I shall also be considering further action to recover unlawfully applied interest and charges that have been levied on the “Agreement”.

Yours faithfully,

 

Hope this helps, Magda

Edited by MAGDA
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...