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

Interesting response following a CCA request


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6473 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

A DLA (Direct Legal) has bought an account from Citi and is chasing me for payment. There were several issues I disagreed with about this accoutn so I sent a request in the the CCA 1974. They continued to pursue.

 

I then sent an email to Trading Standards and copied in Direct Legal's Data Controller, who sent me the following email:

 

I can confirm that this account has been placed on hold, pending receipt of a copy of the agreement which was requested from the sellers in August, 2006. Certain of our staff were ‘mis-informed’ to notify you that we had complied, or were complying, with section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act. Please accept my apologies for the continued action without having addressed the relevant points.

Until the document is provided we will not resume recovery action and accept that we are in breach, technically, of the statutory provisions. However, if we are unable to provide a copy, we will be able to provide an extract of all the terms and conditions and contract details as at the time of signing thereby remedying the breach. (The logistical aspects of recovering a document from CitiFinancial archives makes it virtually impossible to comply within the retrieval timescales envisaged appropriate by the act some 32 years ago).

His email suggests that he believes that if they cannot get a copy of the original agreement then a copy of the Ts and Cs the company was using at the time will suffice.

My argument, of course, is that I never agreed to these Ts and Cs, and without a signature they cannot prove otherwise.

Any comments...?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Am also dealing with DLC at the moment, who is your contact there? Initials A.S.?

 

They seem to be ignoring me though.

 

They did send me a photocopy of their terms and conditions, (which was nice), and a photocopy of some random agreement details between them and Citi, though there was no mention of any specific account on them. Seems like a waste of a stamp to me.

 

See here:- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-bailiffs-advice/29248-advice-opinions.html

 

Anyway, I've heard nothing since I replied. Time's up on the 8th October, battle plans are being drawn up as we speak.

Smile:-The Ethical Bank:- Settled July 2006

HSBC:- Pre-lim sent 09/10/2006

LBA sent:-26/10/2006

Court papers issued:- 13/11/2006

Citifinancial/DLC:- Ongoing since 21st August. Now part of an OFT investigation into Debt Collection Practices.

I am only a Doctor of Love NOT Law. Don't blame me if me advice goes belly up!

:D (I will try to help all the same)

 

If i've helped, use the scales at the top to tell me how great I am!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep us all posted.

If the name of the claim is blue and underlined, click it to see how I did it.

  • Halifax - 1st Request for £3748.80 sent 10/06 Settled in full and 5% donated


  • Goldfish - Unable to comment further, have a read


  • Lloyds - Data Protection Act sent 19/04 1st estimated request for £1500 sent15/08 LBA sent 08/09


  • Carphone Warehouse - Data Protection Act sent 19/04 Chased 04/07 ICO complaint 18/07


  • First National - 1st Request for £280 sent 05/05 Settled in full and 5% donated


  • Yes car credit - LBA sent 19/07 Court Action launched 26/09


  • HFC Bank - 1st Request for £100 sent 06/06 Settled in full and 5% donated


Like what I said? Hit the scales on the top right of my post. Cheers

 

Disclaimer - By giving advice, I am not putting myself across as a legal expert. Always seek professional advice.

Help the site, donate 5%, I have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont like DLC - they have fial several of my CCA requests over teh past 12montths but they just go silent so i leave it.

 

i didnt have a letter last week and this week off them looking for my parents lol...they obviously looked up my previous addess and saw i was conected some how and wrote to me about them!

 

naturally i said i have never heard of these people :)

People who haven't made mistakes, haven't made anything!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...