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

We moved into a semi-detached new build 2 years ago. On one side, we have our driveway up to our detached neighbor’s wall. We have minimal but good relationships with both neighbors. Almost 2 months ago, the detached neighbor asked to access our driveway and remove a fence panel temporarily for building work, promising to restore everything.

The work started, and initially, it seemed like a patio, but then they dug foundations and began building a timber frame extension. We went away for the weekend and come home to find the final roof beam now extends over our fence by 5-10 cm, which might increase with slate tiles and guttering. The fence, initially attached to the exterior wall of their house, defined our boundary clearly, as the wall led onto the fence and went straight down the garden. .

After speaking with the neighbor, he mentioned Building Control approved the work on the basis that the eaves of the original roof already overhang the boundary, but he understood our concern and would talk to the builders. I checked our title pack (having some conveyancing knowledge) and found no Covenant or Easement for the original roof overhang. This raises questions about possible flying trespass or incorrect fence placement if the boundary line should in fact be in line with the eaves!

The neighbor has since avoided us, and the builders paused work for nearly 3 weeks, aside from fitting some glass to the front of the extension. Recently, a 'manager' visited, but no update followed, and now the neighbor is on holiday. I'm worried the builders will continue without addressing the overhang issue.

Questions:

  1. Should I contact Planning about potential trespass, even though no Planning Permission was needed?
  2. If the original eaves overhang the boundary, does this allow the new extension to do the same?
  3. Can I deny the builders driveway access if the situation escalates, especially since they still need to install cladding?
  4. Am I overreacting about a minor issue?

Thanks for your advice!

 

 

 

 

 

 

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...