I purchased a HP Pavilion All in One computer pc in Feb. 2010. Since May last year I have been unable to use it properly as it keeps blue-screening. I have taken it in for repair to 2 different companies one in May 2013 and the other in Nov. 2013 who have both replaced the hard-drive at a total cost of £180 . It still keeps blue screening and I was told by both companies to go back to PC World and state that my machine is not fit for purpose. I was also informed by the last company that he would be willing to give me an engineers report letter and that the machine should be in working order for 5 yrs. at least. Can anyone advise me please, pin62.

I bought a laptop from PCworld, in the first year of ownership it started to over heat, I sent it away for repair and it came back and worked ok for about 3 months then it started to over heat again and I sent it away again and it came back fixed. About 6 months ago the fault started again I arranged again for it to be repaired, this time stating the sale of goods act because it was outside of the warranty, it came back again after about 2 weeks fixed. The fault has just started again and I will be contacting them again to get it fixed, the issue I have is if it keeps going wrong every 6 months at what stage will they no longer be obliged to fix it, it is an i7, 17 inch laptop so its a good spec and I like the laptop. Should I request a more permanent remedy, ie replacement, refund, I understand it would possibly be a partial refund because I have used it a lot, just wondering the beast plan of attack.

On Saturday we were in Morrisons, Newport, Isle of Wight and I urgently needed to use the disabled toilet which was at the far end of the store. On arrival there is a big notice on the door stating that you need to get the toilet door key from till one. As there was no way I could make it to till one at that point I used the gents toilet with great difficulty as the cubicles are very small even if you are only using elbow crutches like myself. You are not required to get a key for the gents or the ladies in that Morrisons and can enetr as and when you please. I feel that this Morrisons store is discriminating against those that have disabilities and should be reported to whoever enforces the Equality Act laws. Unfortunately I have no idea who this would be so looking for assistance. I have written to Morrisons and their standard reply is that the manager and staff need further training etc etc. I am very annoyed due to the embarrassment suffered by myself plus others that may be affected by this silly rule of theirs.

Hi all, Would appreciate a bit of help if possible. I signed up to their Act Now Alerts service and was not "alerted" when I exceeded my limit. I've been trying to point this out to them for over a year now and during which time they've continually applied defaults to my account (FOS were useless as they said that fees were applied in line with T&C and didn't address the non-notification). The case seems to be being passed around the entire Consumer Care Team with no acknowledgement of fault. Any advice please? Does anyone have a contact address for a master and commander? Thanks in advance

I renewed / took a new contract with you over 7 weeks ago. Part of the deal was that I get Sky Mobile TV included. Bottom line is it is still not working and I am getting bored of explaining the history of how much time I have wasted on this. Therefore please can you call Olly at the Bluewater store on 020 3551 8641 who has all the details of this farcical situation. My number is 079xxx. Your twitter staff are useless too. Now I keep keep getting nonsensical emails from people such as: Jagruti Manshani (Vodafone Customer Services) dated 10/04/14 Aftab Alam (Vodafone Customer Services) dated 11/04/14 Johnson Samuel (Vodafone Customer Services) dated 12/04/14 All of these emails and more are in breach of the companies act. It is confusing for consumers to know who they are dealing with. Under Sections 82 to 84 of the Companies Act 2006 (in conjunction with Statutory Instrument 2008/495) a limited companies letter-headed paper, emails and website must disclose the full company name, company number, registered office address and place of registration (i.e. a statement such as ‘Registered in England & Wales’). Anyway I have reported them to Companies House who are in the process of making contact with Vodafone UK. Perhaps Vodafone Risk and Compliance Department needs the sack?? Any news on my Sky Mobile TV? I only renewed my contract as this formed part of the agreement. As it still has not been provided Vodafone are in clear breach. Also please don't give me any BS about the contract is for airtime only. Check the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1972

I'm just after some quick advice. I'm aware of what the DVCV Act is and the rushed amendment to allow Bailiff right of access, which is yet to actually have any guidelines set for the particular amendment. What I want to know, does the bailiff regulations out way the DVCV Act in terms of conditions IE: A warrant is not enforceable, whereby it is identified that a vulnerable person/s reside at the property. Cheers

I received a letter from Moorcroft in October last year asking me to contact them over an alleged debt to EE (formerly T-Mobile). I replied by email with the prove it letter. I received this response yesterday and just wonder if they are breaching the data protection act. I have removed anything that would identify me but from reading the email they have got my date of birth wrong. Dear Miss xxxxxxxxx Our Client: EE (Formerly T-Mobile) I write further to my recent email regarding the above account and return with our client’s response. Our client has advised us that their records show that this account relates to mobile telephone numbers 07xxxxxxxxx and 07xxxxxxxxx. The original billing address was XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX and the account holders date of birth is xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Our client’s records show that this account was cancelled on the 20th December 2013 due to non payment. Our client has asked that you consider this information and should you dispute opening the above account you are able to contact their Fraud Helpline on 0845 412 5000, selecting option 1,3 then 1 again, so that our client can ensure matters can be fully investigated for you. As previously confirmed your account is currently on hold and this will remain the position for a further 14 days to allow you the opportunity to respond to this email and confirm how you are proceeding with matters. We will also revert back to our client to confirm any contact they may now receive as requested above. Yours sincerely xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Compliance Manager Compliance Department

Sadly, this is yet another thread concerning the dangers of taking "legal advice" from websites without first checking whether the "advice" is correct. The brief background is that the gentleman's car was clamped on his driveway by bailiffs who demanded £477.13. A Notice to Seizure was posted through the door advising the debtor that the bailiff would return at 8.a.m for payment. The debtor visited various websites and read upon one of them the following "advice": "If the vehicle is parked on private land, the clamper has committed a criminal offence" "Section 54 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and the police must arrest the clamper. This legislation is nothing to do with "private car parks". "Time to get out the bolt cutters and report the clamper to the police" Unfortunately, the gentleman took this "advice". He did not use "bolt cutters" but he did manage to remove the clamp. He took pictures of the clamp on his car as "evidence". The bailiff returned to the car earlier than 8.30 and immediately called the police. The debtor had printed of a copy of the "advice" that he had received from the website and asked for the police to ARREST the bailiff. The police refused and informed him that he needed to check his "legal advice". Whilst the argument with the police was going on...the bailiff had called a "removal contractor" and within 20 minutes, his car was loaded onto a low loader. As the removal vehicle had been called the bailiff added a further fee of £175 to the debt. The gentleman offered to pay by CREDIT CARD but this was rejected by the bailiff on the basis that many internet "advice" sites are encouraging debtors to pay by credit card and to then apply for a "charge-back" against the card provider. The bailiff allowed him an extra 45 mins to make payment by alternative means. The debtor could not pay and his car was removed to the vehicle pound and it was not until 5 days later that he was able to get the car released after paying over £840 in cash. The debtor again relied upon the "advice" on various websites and wrote a letter "before action" to the local authority seeking a substantial amount of money. He has received a response from their legal department and contacted me this morning to ask me whether the information from the local authority is correct. YES IT IS !!!! Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. The Act received Royal Assent on 1st May 2012 and came into force on 1st October 2012 and this legislation is directed at the proprietors of private car parks. Below you will see a link to a Fact Sheet from the Home Office and Department for Transport In particular, you will need to read the paragraph under the heading of Lawful Authority which states as follows: The term “lawful authority” means where specific legislation or express powers are in force, which allow for vehicles to be legally immobilised or removed. Examples of lawful authority include where statutory powers exist such as Road Traffic Regulations which allow local authorities or the police to clamp or tow vehicles on public roads" "Certificated bailiffs retain their powers to immobilise or remove vehicles" "Certain statutory authorities also retain the ability to clamp and tow, such as the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) and Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA), who will continue to clamp or tow vehicles which are un-roadworthy or have not had their vehicle tax paid" https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/98406/fact-sheet-part3.pdf

Hi In todays high winds,our neighbour opened her car door and it blew open and damaged the rear bumper on mine,my wife just so happened to be outside when it happened thank goodness. Now they are happy to sort this without involving the insurance companys,but my neighbours husband said it was pointless going through insurance because it would be seen as an act of god and would have to go 50/50 with our insurance,though he is quite happy to pay for the repairs out of his own pocket,and me being in the trade can "get the parts cheap:frown:". Is this true? thanks in advance graham

Hi, I just need to know that what I’m doing is correct? I bought a motorcycle 1 yr and 2mths ago, the cam chain has snapped and caused £4300 damage, the manufacturer has kindly said they will pay 50% of the parts, but have also stated it’s a lifetime part and shouldn’t snap, they are writing this in a report for me, I’m sending the garage I purchased the bike from a letter stating the sale of goods act, saying I would like them to pay for the repairs as I’ve only covered 3-4k miles on it and haven’t had reasonable use, now the manufacturer has stated the offer is only available until end of Feb, do I tell the garage owner this in the letter or is this pressuring them? Also do I address the letter to both of the owners as there are two, husband and wife? The bike has only covered in total 23k miles and has a full service history, I’m also including the £177 it cost to diagnose the fault in the claim. What’s the likely hood of me winning? He’s gone from saying I don’t have a leg to stand on to send me the details and I’ll speak to my solicitor, do I have a good case? Sorry first post is a question. Cheers

Hi All, I'm not sure if this is in the right section Anyway some time ago my wife was working a large company (cannot name them). After been relocated to an office in Leeds they then decided that after a year or so they needed her back in Bradford as they suggested there was no longer a position required in Leeds as they were managing from a central hub. When my wife moved to Leeds they also served notice on her company car so she would have to get public transport. At the time my wife saw this move to Leeds as a good career opportunity and we have a direct bus route at the end of our road although not ideal as we were back to one car. So after a year or so the company said they wanted her to move back to Bradford doing a role she did when she first started at the company some years ago. Her argument against taking the role was that it was a step back in career from what she was doing in her current role. Also due to the location of the office she would have to get three busses or pay for a car to get to work. With this in mind we would actually be financially worse off as we would need to buy and run another car however the company were not willing to offer any financial incentive to assist the change. Anyway my wife had no option to go off sick as by working the role was informally accepting it. After a lot of discussions between the parties a negotiation was underway for a settlement offer. During this time my wife approached a recruitment consultants to try and ascertain whether her skills would be required in the current market or whether she is likely to be unemployed for sometime. Obviously from our position this was important information with which to base the settlement offer on. Anyway after a visit to one recruitment company they made an error by sending my wife's CV to her current employer who she was negotiating the settlement with. Her current employers view was that although off on sick she was actively seeking work which was not the case. In this instance they drastically reduced the settlement offer by approx 25% suggesting she was fit for work etc. So my question is do we have any come back on the recruitment company for sending her CV to her current employer? Can we put a small claim in to recover the 25%?

Hi, I would like you to help me with this situation where my joint loan agrrement from MBNA in year 2001 was given to me with PPI included in it. when I asked for CCA they sent me copy of the contract then I realised there is PPI in it. When I asked from DCA DLC to provide me with the t & C of this PPI they told me I have to contact original creditor (But DLC had forbidden me to contact original creditor through a letter in 2002). My question is as PPI is part of CCA of this loan, can this whole agreement be considered as 'disputed' until PPI issue is not resolved? Please respond ASAP. I have to reply to DLA who are pressurising me now to pay the debt. If there is any template letter to write to MBNA on the basis of above ino. please let me have it and a template letter to SHUT UP DLC. Waiting to hear from you. Thank you very much for all your help in the past, present and future...

Hi There, I am hoping that someone on the forum can help me. I would like to know if the sale of goods act covers puppies. I have recently bought a male puppy from a breeder that is supposed to be kennel club registered. When I collected my pup the breeder said she would send on the papers to me once they had arrived. I had to email the breeder almost weekly to ask for the papers and when they did arrive they were for a different female dog. I have been in contact again and the breeder has said there are no papers left. I contacted the kennel club to see if they could help but they cannot and they advised me to check out the sale of goods act. I am concerened as the puppy is a staffordshire bull terrier and without the registration papers could be classed under the Breed Specific Legislation law as of the pitbull type. I am running out of patience with this breeder as she has started ignoring my emails to try to clear the matter up. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Hi Everyone, I am not sure if this topic has been covered yet so apologies if I have not seen the post. I have recently phoned my insurance company for a quote I had 3 points on my licence for going 5 MPH over the limit in a 30 how frustrating was that after 30 odd years with no problems points or bans etc completely clean licence any how I have kept a clean sheet for the past three years and they will be off my license unfortunately the insurance companies are quoting the Rehabilitations Act 1974 and will be on my file for 5 years is this at all fair for such a minor incident my premiums are still affected and I thought by keeping a clean sheet for 3 years etc and waiting for the day for them to be removed only to be categorised as a criminal for another two years It just does not feel fair for such a minor offence is there any thing that can be done to change the law or Im I alone in thinking that it is terrible

Hi, Does anyone know the limitations of a S7 DPA request when used in the following context. Limited Company in voluntary liquidation. I am a creditor and debtor to the company. The company liquidators have sent a debt collection agency after me, for a £6k preferential payment even though the company owes me nearly 10 times that. I sent a DPA request back in August, and received a bundle of email communication and letters, specifically relating to corespondence between myself and the liquidator. Am I allowed to ask for information relating to me, from communication between the debt collector and the liquidator, or just the email exchange and letters that I received so far?

I purchased a petrol strimmer on 13 August from a catalogue, but it does not work, and I have never been able to use it. I have been told by the catalogue that I cannot return it, and they have referred me to a third party to get it repaired. This is proving to be a long winded process and am getting increasingly frustrated. I thought that if a customer bought a product that is faulty, they could send it back to the catalogue within 6 months. Is this correct?

Hi, i am not going to go into too much detail on this thread, i have been searching the internet for help etc but Transport Investigations are simply having none of it. I have groveled, offered to pay admin fees, asked for an our of court settlement and i had a third letter to which they have re-asses my case and they see no reason why it should not go to court. I have sent another letter today, again groveling but this time i have offered them £350.00 as an out of court settlement and begged them to consider it. If i am honest, i would be surprised if they even replied to this letter, as the next letter i am expecting is a court summons. I would just like some information on the above offense if convicted for it, when does the offence become 'spent'? What is the average overall fine for the offense? It was my first time offense and i am gutted to say the least but it looks as though they will not budge. Thanks for any help.

I work for a local authority doing criminal prosecutions and have been involved leading a case with a dangerous mental health patient. During this time he has been violent to me and other individuals, threatening people with knives, guns and rape. I have also seized equipment from him with a case pending. A partner organisation is running a civil case to evict him, but in doing so have disclosed to him, my full name, date of birth, home address, home phone number, place of work and employee number. He has seen and retained the information. With the cases pending, all agencies - council, housing association, mental health team and police, consider that myself and my family are at great risk as the individual lives 10 minutes walk from my house. The housing association have accepted a breach of data protection, but offered no redress, so I am considering pursuing damages in court. With the tightening on damage claims, does the forum think i have suffered damage and distress ? (I do, and the house has been altered to make it as secure as possible, however the wife and kids are extremely uncomfortable) Thanks for any advice.

Hello, As I wrote in somebody elses' thread, [my apologies for that] I've been harassed by "PE" since January/February, for being a bit late back from shopping with two disabled people at "Morrisons" in Stone, Staffordshire, back in December. Anyway, as a result, all of my disabled people, who I ferry to and from the shops, decided to boycott "Morrisons", and, so far, their takings from us, as of today, 23 July 2013, [groceries, cafe and filling station], are down by £9477.18 I am partway through a letter to their CEO, to be sent "recorded, signed for", when I locate him/her, and an address. Now, the letter before action from "PE", states that, my "appeal" failed. I didn't send an appeal, not to "PE", or to Morrisons!! I did send a letter of complaint to Morrisons, [complaint, you should note, not appeal], in which I requested a copy of the document which gave "PE" permission to operate on Morrisons car park - no copy was received, although I did get a rather mealy mouthed reply about "providing receipts". What? after a few weeks, when I'd been away on holiday, and the majority of the receipts would not have been mine, anyway, they were issued to my disabled "charges" I wrote a further letter reminding them of "The Equality Act" So, if "PE" take me to court, and the first thing that I do is to demand the copy of my "appeal", they wouldn't be able to produce one - the only thing that they might be able to produce, would be my letters to Morrisons - would either of these actions cause their case to fail? Either on the grounds of their "consideration" of a non existant "appeal" letter, proving them to be liars, or by trying it on with a letter, patently not written to them, but passed on by Morrisons, and that would surely have Data Protection issues for both outfits? Comments and advice welcomed, please. Sam

Hi all, After reading the forum on here for a very long time and gaining some excellent advice, I have finally joined as I could please do with some advice. In March 2012 I submitted a subject access request to a council. It’s a long story but I fought them for a while to get my files. The council have sent me files on three different occasions, the last been November 2012. I know the council still have not sent me everything, so I decided to take the matter to court and issued a claim under section 7 and 15, also damages and costs within the discretion of the court. I put no amount at all. The claim was served and the court sent me the council’s allocation questionnaire saying they were defending it in full. They also sent a defence claiming they did not breach the Act. Yet it took them nearly eight months to send me files and the ICO said they have breached the Act. Since then the council have wrote to me offering me £500 as long as I withdraw the claim and sign a confidentiality agreement. This is where I’m not sure what to do, as there letter is titled Without Prejudice save as to Costs. Also on the council’s allocation questionnaire they ticked the box suitable for the small claims track, yet where it says if you think it’s suitable for small claims do not put costs. They have put costs of over £2000. To be honest I was not expecting all of this, seeing as they quite blatantly breached the Act. I am not really sure what to do now. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks

Hi, I bought a laptop from apple a few years ago (2008), which was subsequently replaced due to issues and faults last year (April 2012). My new laptop has now also come up with a bunch of issues, which after an appointment with apple has indicated an internal issue. I talked to the manager asking whether my laptop would be covered under the "Sales of Goods Act", to which the manager said no due to the fact that, the protection granted from this only applies to the original product and from the original point of sale and that I have no claim. I asked the question before I left asking if the "statutory warranty" applied at time of sale of at the time of receipt of the goods and he said sale. Coming home and having done a little research I think he was incorrect and that this replacement laptop should have its own statutory warranty applied to it. Is there any basis for this? Am I completely off base or do I have a claim to have my laptop repaired?

Hi all, Sorry if this post is a bit long but here goes.... Bought a 2011 Astra from a Vauxhall dealer 27 days ago, upon receiving the V5C today it says 2 former keepers whereas when I bought the car I remember the advert saying "one owner". I know about the Sale of goods act so I rang consumer advice and explained the situation however I didn't have an proof of the advert and they said Autotrader might not be able to track it or not release it due to data protection etc unless the matter went further legally, so I was worried the dealer might act dumb. Phoned up Autotrader and luckily the person on the other end of the phone said they can email me the latest version of the text in the ad, without any problems with data protection and if needed they would help with forwarding the text onto anyone else who may need it. Here's the email I got..... 2011 11 Reg Vauxhall Astra 2.0 CDTi 16V SE 5dr Auto, 5 Doors, Automatic, Hatchback, Diesel, 34,732 miles, Grey, *One Owner Full Service History*, Balance of Manufacturer Warranty, Cruise Control, Multi-Function Steering Wheel, CD Player, Body Coloured Bumpers, Automatic Headlamps, Front Fog Lights, Metallic Paint, Rear Wash Wipe, Adjustable Door Mirrors, Adjustable Steering Column, Air Conditioning, Electric Front and Rear Windows, Electric Mirrors, Trip Computer, ABS, Automatic Gearbox, Power Assisted Steering (PAS), Daytime Running Lights, Side Impact Protection, Isofix Child Seat Brackets, Central Locking, Deadlocks, Immobiliser, Remote Central Locking, 17" Alloy Wheels.£9,873Click 'Visit Website' for more approved used cars. So as advised I have sent a letter using a template to the dealer recorded delivery explaining the situation and have put "I would like this matter to be resolved either by a full refund, return of our part exchange car and monies or an acceptable replacement." I could ask for just some compensation and keep the car but one of the criteria when I was looking for cars was it to be just one former keeper. Just wondering if anyone has any idea what might happen and if they become difficult what to do,also if we got out PX car back what the deal would be as far as former keepers on it as we bought it from new so wouldn't really want to be the 2nd keepers and if that was the case could we be compensated for it as far as depreciation is concerned and insurance admin fees for changing cars etc etc. If i get a full refund then I'll be without a car so would that be considered as far as inconvenience and costs are concerned. Thanks for any advice given, Alan

Hi. Hoping for some advice. Mum has an ipad 1 3g model, roughly £500 cost. Bought from Currys 2 years 2 months ago. Problem when charging. If its left in charging and gets to 100% it shuts down completely. Can take up to an hour to reboot. For the parents its a lifeline. Elderly, dealing with cancer, keep in touch with skype, emails. To me this doesnt sound like a battery issue, as it holds its charge. Seems to be more hardware related. Currys simply state under sales of goods act that batteries are consumables and therefore the SOGA doesnt apply here. They also tell my parents to go to apple, as they dont deal with apple battery problems. My questions are... Firstly we dont know its a battery issue. However , if it is, Ipad 1 batteries were actually glued into the ipad. There is no way for an average consumer to open up an ipad and replace the battery. Therefore i feel this is an integral part of the ipad 1 and not a consumable. I also have a recording i made for personal use with a lady from Apple who states it is 'perfectly reasonable' to expect an ipad battery to only last 2 years. If however the battery is glued in, and made so that the consumer cannot replace it without going to an apple authorised dealer , i dont feel this is a consumable battery in the same way a laptap battery may be. They are in effect admitting its reasonable to expect an ipad to last 2 years only. If a consumer tried to replace the battery themselves the warranties would be invalidated. Does anyone have a view or advice or whether 'impossible to remove' batteries by consumers are classed still as consumables? Secondly, Currys simply refer us to Apple. Ive advised we dont know if this is a battery related issue and that our contract is with Currys, not Apple. However, no joy here, they stick to the same line. Any advice as to how to get Currys to deal with the issue? Lastly, i realise that if i was to issue small claims court proceedings, i would need an independent report done on the ipad to show the fault. Anyone know of anyone decent in the Nottingham or Manchester area. Many thanks.

Good morning Under the sale of goods act what is a reasonable time for a washing machine to last, for a family of 4 , any one now. Thanks

Folks, I have started a petition on www.change.org to have section 136 of the act changed such that assignees of a debt can only charge a multiple of the price the paid for a debt , rather than the current practice of trying to recover the full amount, usually by frightening a hard pressed debtor into a financial arrangement he cannot afford. If you feel able to support my petition place go to the change.org website and sign. Title is Amend the 1925 Law of property act S136 Thanks