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

BES have ruined our businesss, home & life - Misled by Commercial Rep


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3089 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

Here we go again!

 

The thing that makes me so annoyed is that two weeks ago BES instructed lawyers to threaten users of this site and others with 'deformation', who offered honest and genuine views and opinions of the company.

 

This quite honestly, is a nasty way to attempt to clean up an already tarnished reputation, and is rather ineffective as any claim is defensible under Honest Opinion, True Comment, Fair Comment and Public Interest which under these circumstances are entirely reasonable - plus people like me who actually took legal advise will tell everyone these letters were issued!

 

My legal advise was they would "be mad" to attempt to issue proceedings, and if they did with their provable reputation the case would fail and some expert witnesses. Unfortunately, my actual legal advise is rude to share in the internet, but it came from a major QC who is used to litigation cases in the billions!

 

It would appear BES are getting through their solicitors too. Heatons LLP, Berg, now Harrison Drury. Perhaps the solicitors are starting to realise something is clearly wrong here?

 

Of course Pilley is nothing but a victim. Victimised by major news corporations, victimised by the BBC, victimised by multiple websites and their hundreds of users , victimised by Ofgem..... Which is clearly why near identical complaints have been made hundreds of times over 5+ websites over 4 years.

 

Rant out of the way...... Let me look in some detail at your complaint, and I shall get back to you on how I think you can get yourself out of this mess!

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I do note your position, but I think that is a bit over the top.

 

While I was harsh on the rep, I did acknowledge their comments, but they were generally poor - so I grilled them to get a definite answer, which they declined to do.

 

It makes me very sad and angry to see companies operate like this, it is not fair on hard working people.

 

For example, one person who I've come to know through their experiences; his wife sadly died aged 37 leaving him with 3 young children to look after.... He invested her life insurance into a business, and had to close his business as the electricity bills were coming in 4-5 times higher per month than promised. So he's now lost everything.

 

I'm sorry, if I gave BES a grilling, and made them feel uncomfortable and the knock on effect to you - but it is within the Public Interest for them to be exposed for what they are. They had every right of reply in the public eye, but chose not to.

 

Plus, if your company is in a reputational crisis, you don't take those steps to save it.... Logic dictates that you show people that you are a changed business - but it would seem from the recent post about a non-profit organisation, this doesn't seem to be happening.

 

I can provide supporting evidence to many of my comments... But as you will appreciate, I didn't want genuine victims to suffer more harassment and intimidation.

 

In any case, innocent members of the public with no connection to the websites didn't deserve to receive these letters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Brainless,

 

Do you use less than 100,000KWH hours per year? It may be interesting to read Ofgem's Electricity Supply Standard Licence Conditions, which suppliers are required to adhere to in order to retain their license.

 

Section 7B.4 The Standards of Conduct are that:

 

(a) the licensee behaves and carries out any actions in a Fair, honest, transparent,appropriate and professional manner;

 

(b) the licensee provides information (whether in Writing or orally) to each MicroBusiness Consumer which:

(i) is complete, accurate and not misleading (in terms of the information provided or omitted);

(ii) is communicated (and, if provided in Writing, drafted) in plain and intelligible language;

(iii) relates to products or services which are appropriate to the Micro Business Consumer to whom it is directed; and

(iv) is otherwise Fair both in terms of its content and in terms of how it is presented (with more important information being given appropriate prominence);

 

© the licensee:

(i) makes it easy for a Micro Business Consumer to contact the licensee,

(ii) acts promptly to put things right when the licensee makes a mistake, and

(iii) otherwise ensures that customer service arrangements and processes are fit for purpose and transparent.

 

7B.5 The licensee must take all reasonable steps to achieve the Standards of Conduct and ensure that it interprets and applies the Standards of Conduct in a manner consistent with the Customer Objective.

 

If you as allege you were entered into the contract fraudulently, I would advise you contact the Police.

 

While the companies in question may not have the recordings, if this becomes a criminal matter, the CPS will very easily be able to get those recordings from the telecom company.

 

I think it fair comment to suggest something sounds fishy in the way the Warrant was obtained. Do you have a copy?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...