Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

HFC stayed claim now marlin SD ***WON + COSTS***


VIENNA
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5512 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

Update--WON!:)

 

Had a different Judge yesterday at the second hearing

 

we started off with a nice little chat about Rankine,

I quoted all the applicable case law and the comments by Prof Goode.

 

Then we mentioned the CCA 74 and had a chat about s78 and 127,

it seemed as if the Judge wanted to see if I knew what I was talking about.

 

Then the Judge moved on to the other side......................and wow, almost exploded!

 

quoting CCA and the fact that there was no agreement and flooring them!

 

Then it came to costs.

My request was fairly substantial

[ well, I have spent lots of money on coffee whilst reading CAG! ]

but there was hardly a whimper from the other side and I got the costs I requested.

 

When they pay up a donation to CAG will be forthcoming and a big thanks for all the help from you guys, thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

HAHAH This is brilliant, well done you! was there a default on your credit file, did they remove it? CONGRATULATIONS

 

And it is Goodnight Vienna !!:)

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lula wrote-

 

And it is Goodnight Vienna !!

 

Yes Lula and it certainly will be if they dont pay up!

 

42man-I got the impression that this Judge wasn't impressed with the fact that this matter had got to a second hearing.

 

I also got the impression that,

as I had submitted a comprehensive bundle to the court,

the Judge wanted to test my knowledge on some of the content of those documents, case law etc. [probably because of my costs claim?].

 

as this was my application [for set aside]

I introduced myself on entering and said good afternoon to the Judge.

 

I'm not too sure if I should have taken the lead in this way but I later wondered if my confidence helped me throughout the hearing.

 

We started with a discussion on Rankine and others and, to my surprise, there was very little response, even from the other side, who only briefly intervened [although I did rabbit on a bit!].

 

My preparation seemed to pay off as I could quote all the cca stuff, regs and case law without reference to any documents.

 

The Judge seemed au fait with the cca stuff and then suddenly changed tone when speaking to the other side.

 

They were left in no doubt as to the Judges feelings on the matter, what are you doing?!!!

[issuing SD].

 

They were almost chastised and made little response from thereonin.

 

I was then surprised that the costs issue wasn't debated much

, I didn't expect it to be that simple and thought that the other side would get more involved with this.

So now I'm waiting for a cheque!

Link to post
Share on other sites

42man wrote-

 

If they don't pay up then send in the bailiffs !!!

 

To be honest, given their conduct so far, I may well find myself in that situation. I think I'll start preparing for it now, just in case;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...