Jump to content
We are now - The National Consumer Service ×


  • Tweets

    No tweets were found.

  • 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
      • 162 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
        • Thanks
        • Like

Recommended Posts

I completely forgot, I think .......:!: ....... to post about how the Ombudsman helped with my son's very long, ongoing trouble with Abbey / Santander.

 

The lost paperwork, ignored letters, the list went on and on. My son is registered with a socio/learning disability so he had been getting into so many difficulties it was a mammoth task to work through it all.

 

We appealed to the FOS on a couple of key issues which I had read carefully from Bankfodder and others as well as failing to handle the account fairly etc.

 

We didn't win on the very unfair charges - which I think we should have as I argued that nowhere were these charges explained before they were incurred and they were penalties - ie when he spent up to £5 he was charged £5 every time, and when he spent £5.01 upwards, he was charged £15 for every payment.

 

They had the option to stop his card but obviously didn't do so as it was a very nice little earner - or so they thought.

 

The Ombudsman found in my son's favour because, despite having years of communication on the issue, the bank failed to have due regard to the MALG guidelines and act accordingly.

 

She pointed out the catalogue of errors and her decision was to award my son £100 to be paid to him as compensation and NOT used to reduce the debt.

 

We agreed and he was duly paid which helped him enormously as he was in real difficulties.

 

That help didn't stop there. I then contacted Santander and asked them to consider writing the debt off given that my son had no prospects of any employment, was waiting for supported accommodation and his outlook was bleak.

 

The upshot was they went straight back to their old games of refusing to discuss the matter with me (despite the Ombudsman pulling them up over their attitude towards us having to send in multiple letters of authority), refusing to then help my son with his finances and immediately sending out threatening letters, despite the FOS stating before that they were unacceptable in their content and had been harassment - and this is where the Ombudsman's ruling really kicked in, because by agreeing to the settlement, they also had to agree with her findings.

 

So I went back to the FOS and explained what was happening, received advice from the person who had handled the complaint, and that gave me all the ammunition to go back to Santander and fight back at their behaviour.

 

Result - my son had the whole of the debt (most of which was a result of their outrageous charges) written off completely with no comeback.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

That is a good result for your son and hopefully it should make Santandurrrr revisit their practices. I don't think it will though.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...