Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • 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

RBS credit card claim won now new claim after sale by OC


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4651 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 HH

 

I think some of the advice you have received is well balanced and fairly succint [Ganymede]. You have an order for payment by 2014 ........ 39 months left by my calendar.

 

Looking at this objectively the DJ visiting your redetermination did you a favour, there is no order for instalments, merely a final restitution date. You are not obliged to contract out of CPR and there is nothing tortious within failing to respond to the current correspondence. It appears to be nothing but bullying tactics. I'd be inclined to either ignore or invite the sols to apply for a redermination of the errr redetermination :-)

 

In basic terms they missed an opportunity to apply for a CO and are now trying to bully you into earlier settlement.

 

Gez

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 278
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

a 'redetermination' is n/a re a forthwith judgment.

there was a forthwith. hammy then applied for a variation. the instalments offered were objected to by the claimant. so, the court ordered full payment by 2014? is this correct?

if so, then in order to vary that judgment another application for a variation would need to be done eg for an instalment order. this would prob be objected to again by the claimant. could negotiate a monthly repayment with them to pay in full by 2014, but as you say this would mean paying around 500/month! could try for a reduced amount in full and final?

they prob haven't applied for a charging order because you are not technically in default of the judgment. but, they prob will do after 2014 if that order is still in force and payment hasn't been made.

imo

Edited by Ford
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your help folks

 

Matt, no payments are being made at the moment, I offered £40.00 per month and that was really scraping the barrel, they refused and wanted nearly £600 or payment by 2014 if I remember correctly. Have to dig their original letter out.

 

Angie, it is back with the original solicitors, the other solicitors gave up the ghost and I have received a notice of change.

 

I feel by offering payment and enclosing an I & E they will probably reject again due to the large amount of debt.

 

Ford, are you saying that if I applied for re-determination this would be refused as I have requested this before and the claimant objected to my monthly payment.

 

HH

Link to post
Share on other sites

.................Ford, are you saying that if I applied for re-determination this would be refused as I have requested this before and the claimant objected to my monthly payment.

 

HH

 

not necessarily. was suggesting that the claimant might again object (as they did before?) to the instalments offered in the application. if they do, it would then be for the J to decide again in the circumstances. the J's decision could go either way. it may be more favourable than the current order, the same, or less favourable!

note that it would be an application for a 'variation' not a 'redetermination'.

imo

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...