Ive read this whole thread. Took me hours. I have only one question, wtf does any of this have to do with poopscoop?

It Won’t

Interesting interpretation of language; I took the “may” in Lings reference to charges to mean much the same as “reserves the right to”, as in; if we can’t get the supplier to cancel any charges or we otherwise manage to find a buyer for this car we’ve spent time acquiring then you can expect a charge. In fact, Ling almost makes this point in her first post and that she was only going in hard because the OP had bad-mouthed her pre-emptively.

I’ve seen a similar approach taken with cancelled hotel bookings etc where any deposit is returned if the room is subsequently let out over that period.

It would be interesting to hear if everyone who’s ever cancelled with Ling has had to pay her regarfless or how many have had any charge waived.

summitchilterns – Member
Poopscoop – I can’t decide so are you actually GeordieMick’s brother or his daddy?

Neither, I would hope I have the guts to stand up for anyone being held up as a public pariah when the facts actually say he has done nothing wrong.

I would like to think that most people would do the same actually.

This thread proves there are exceptions however. Deciding to instead use abusive personal attacks on a person that simply wanted some advice.

Some people are obviously morally offended by that. Which is a shame.

DT – Who’re you???

Poopscoop – moral of the story is don’t sign a contract and agree to said T’s and C’s of a contract until you understand it and know whether it is lawfully binding. In this case fortunately for Michael from Newcastle it was wasn’t!

summitchilterns – Member
Poopscoop – moral of the story is don’t sign a contract and agree to said T’s and C’s of a contract until you understand it and know whether it is lawfully binding. In this case fortunately for Michael from Newcastle it was wasn’t!

Many morals in this story…

So every contact you’ve ever signed you’ve had checked out by a solicitor?

For a mobile.
Broad band package.
Credit card.

Etc etc….

Personally I expect a company to be lawful by default and that I shouldnt have to get legal council for every document I sign.

Made it, we’ll done everyone! 🙂

Oh for gods sake, anyone can write up any kind of contract they like, but if it contains unlawful clauses such as ‘we will take your first born’ it’s unenforceable.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/sep/29/londoners-wi-fi-security-herod-clause

I would hope I have the guts to stand up for anyone being held up as a public pariah

Swoon

Made it, we’ll done everyone!

You had one job.

Ben not what you are doing but if you are building you can charge for your work if they ask you to start within the 14 day period or just wait 14 days then they are bound.
Poolman read the act i’m pretty sure holiday lets are excluded from the act.

RichPenny – Member
Except that it was there on the contract that he signed in black and white and couldn’t have been made any clearer .
Unlikely to be in black and white.

https://www.lingscars.com/images/facebook/cycle_order_form.jpg

Looks pretty black and white to me .

aracer – Member
Ramsey Neil » Except that it was there on the contract that he signed in black and white and couldn’t have been made any clearer .
Well apart from not actually specifying the amount of the cancellation charge, and apart from using the word “may” (both of which mean he hadn’t contractually signed up to anything), then you’re right, it couldn’t have been any clearer.

So would you agree with the original statement that my post ?disputed

It is simply not true to say that the OP was aware of the consequences Ling would attempt to impose in revenge for the OP cancelling.

Ben not what you are doing but if you are building you can charge for your work if they ask you to start within the 14 day period or just wait 14 days then they are bound.

Nope, it’s 14 days from the day the buyer receives the goods.

The only reason it was 14 days from the order in this case is because it’s a lease or somesuch.

It’s been emotional everyone. In ten years time we can all say

I wonder what the response would be from the defenders on here if the OP had done the same to Ben

I don’t. IME this thread is the only time I’ve ever seen anyone suggest timewaster buyers have the moral highground on the grounds that timewasting is legal.

If this happened to Ben we’d all agree that the buyer a) was legally entitled to return the chair and b) was being a bit of a dick.

After reaching our milestone, we should perhaps have a reflective thread where we can post whether this exchange made us less or more likely to buy a car through Ling

funknasterp

^^

Lol, yeah. 🙂

A few of us have developed the “thousand yard stare” ‘cos we were in the **** man, really in it. 😀

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evo3PWrpaEI[/video]

Can someone put some subtitles on this clip?

JUST BUY THE SKODA MICKY BOY …

SIGN THIS CONTRACT.

After reaching our milestone, we should perhaps have a reflective thread where we can post whether this exchange made us less or more likely to buy a car through Ling

We could start a group therapy session . Call it living through Ling

Some good info here if you are interested in consumer law facts instead of bear baiting https://www.gov.uk/guidance/unfair-terms-explained-for-businesses-full-guide

In particular:

Customer cancellations

When you are not at fault, you only seek to recover losses that you have reasonably incurred

You set non-refundable payments or cancellation charges so they reflect a genuine estimate of what you will lose directly because of the customer cancellation

Be clear with customers up-front about your deposits, advance payments and cancellation charges. Provide details of when these are required and why.

Has ling has done this in her posts?

^IME as someone who used to order cars for companies and private individuals under leasing schemes, contract hire, PCP etc, dealers can and do charge leasing companies cancellation fees should the vehicle not be required. Whether or not Ling can charge the customer in this case seems to be debatable but she may well incur significant charges (or none at all, we’ll probably never know!).

I personally think Ling is running scared….

Jamie – Member
I personally think Ling is running scared….

Not at all. Not her nature.
Look up “combative” in the dictionary and Lings picture is there.

She is checking this thread every few minutes or so this evening. I’ve been looking.

I predict a full on Lingathon tomorrow.

Name calling.
Rants.
OP has committed fraud… He hasn’t by the way.
Reasons the law doesn’t apply to her.
Etc etc.

Nothing new.

Then….
Off to her companies FB safety bubble page/ eco chamber to rant a bit more.

My prediction anyway based on previous form.

outofbreath – Member
Ben not what you are doing but if you are building you can charge for your work if they ask you to start within the 14 day period or just wait 14 days then they are bound.
Nope, it’s 14 days from the day the buyer receives the goods.

The only reason it was 14 days from the order in this case is because it’s a lease or somesuch.

POSTED 1 HOUR AGO # REPORT-POST

Ourofbreath you are right I am wrong.i think subject to what Ben is doing in terms of building to customers specification.

Flouncing off now.

Movie to watch. Not relevant to this thread at all.

Not at all. Not her nature.

Well, it was a joke about using reverse psychology to attract her back to the thread.

The picture of the baited trap was a visual clue to really ram home the message.

Sorry Jamie, I did miss the rather big hint there somehow! Lol

This thread was entertaining and amusing but – no longer.
Scotroutes had it on pages 1 & 39.
What happened to the concept that honesty is the best policy?
What about behaving in a ‘morally acceptable manner’?
If we all resorted to legal resolution for everything the world would be a *****ng shit place.
The OP was anything but transparent at the outset but has gradually disclosed more facts (?) – or made more statements..
Based on her accounts – publicly available through the Companies House website – Ling appears to run a profitable business.
As Scotroutes asked at page 39, where are the other dis-satisfied customers?
I would never enter into a PCP deal so Ling would never be on my radar but she has built a successful business so that gets a big thumbs up; she also has a robust attitude to promoting her business and protecting her reputation which is also laudable.
I also fully understand why she would wish to charge a fee in theses circumstances – yes, I know she can’t ‘penalise’ as that gets into the realm of liquidated damages.
The OP has done himself no favours by being ‘economical with the truth’ and continuing to post, using comments from the legally qualified who have given their advice on a pro-bono basis.
Ignoring the facts of the matter, who would you prefer to go boozing with – mad, opinionated Ling with her technicolor attitude or Mick who, apparently, enjoys pursuing legalities rather than behaving in a morally acceptable manner?

who would you prefer to go boozing with – mad, opinionated Ling with her technicolor attitude or Mick

Honestly?

Not Ling. It would be like going out with a really spoilt 12 year old.

That means no beer and being roped into some self promo stunt thing climbing the gherkin in London.

And I would need beer to do that.

We got that you don’t like her about 35 pages ago . You haven’t really added anything since .

Ramsey Neil – Member
We got that you don’t like her about 35 pages ago . You haven’t really added anything since .

Ditto.

Poopy, try to ignore your aversion to Ling; she, clearly, would be much more fun and better company than (morose) Mick.
It could be argued – and you have – that her business practices are illegal; that is yet to be proven – in court – which means you are welcome to your opinion but it counts for nothing. The same applies to me and my opinion.
She may be pushing at the boundaries but all PLCs/SMEs trust and rely on the law so nothing new there.
She’s clearly switched-on.
Your new bestie was uneconomical with the truth from his first post and has been called-out repeatedly throughout this thread.
His gradual revisions of/additions to his original post detract from his starting point.
I would suggest that he – and you – wait until Ling responds; if she doesn’t respond here or elsewhere it doesn’t matter; all that matters is what happens in court.

Except they haven’t even done that here – anybody dealing with ling has the moral highground given she appears to have totally vacated that.

It would probably depend on whether she’d put an order in for the car – which she claims not to have done.

I suggest you ask ling

What about behaving in a ‘morally acceptable manner’?

I suggest you ask ling

If we all resorted to legal resolution for everything the world would be a *****ng shit place.

I suggest you point that out to ling

Based on her accounts – publicly available through the Companies House website – Ling appears to run a profitable business.

I’m sure she does if she can persuade people to pay her cancellation fees for cars she hasn’t ordered.

As Scotroutes asked at page 39, where are the other dis-satisfied customers?

Not on STW?

I also fully understand why she would wish to charge a fee in theses circumstances – yes, I know she can’t ‘penalise’ as that gets into the realm of liquidated damages.

So the appropriate fee would be £0

It could be argued – and you have – that her business practices are illegal; that is yet to be proven – in court – which means you are welcome to your opinion but it counts for nothing. The same applies to me and my opinion.

That opinion is supported by what the resident lawyers have written – I’m not sure on what basis you’re suggesting they’re wrong.

frankconway – Member
Poopy, try to ignore your aversion to Ling; she, clearly, would be much more fun and better company than (morose) Mick.

No aversion to Ling at all, just the “liberal” methods she employs in business.

As for the OP being “morose”?

Yes, I’m sure he would come across that way after all the extraordinarily personal insults he’s endured from some on here.

I’d feel the same in his shoes I think.

aracer – you are tiresome and uninformed.
Are you legally qualified – and, of so, what is your legal specialism?
Do you have any understanding of UK contract law?
Can you direct me to the specific legislation which applies in this matter? The act, page, paragraph, line – anything?
Or is it just empty, vacuous posturing on your part?
You have posted prodigiously on this thread but have provided absolutely no facts.
Please – indulge me – and reply to my specfiic questions ^^^
In the absence of any convincing answers – you are a windbag.

frankconway – Member
aracer – you are tiresome and uninformed.
Are you legally qualified – and, of so, what is your legal specialism?
Do you have any understanding of UK contract law?
Can you direct me to the specific legislation which applies in this matter? The act, page, paragraph, line – anything?
Or is it just empty, vacuous posturing on your part?
You have posted prodigiously on this thread but have provided absolutely no facts.
Please – indulge me – and reply to my specfiic questions ^^^
In the absence of any convincing answers – you are a windbag.

Aside from your personal insults against another member, which seem to be the norm from “your type” on this thread I can only suggest you read the thread properly. Can you manage that? Then you will get the clarification from the resident solicitor on here.

Feel free to insult me too. Always the last recourse of the poorly informed.