crack team of internet lawyers

Are you for real?

Different situations, different variables. Not able to grasp that?

Anyone interested in what the law actually says yet or are we all content just to keep making it up in order to keep the thread rolling?

No, its not intrinsically linked.

The finance and the car are co-dependent. The finance contract solely exists for payment for the provision of a car, the car (will) only exist as provision of goods subject to agreed payment (the finance contract).

I’m not saying that the OP can cancel whenever he likes and not have to pay.

If I was providing bespoke cabinets and the finance for them this is how I would go about it.

Customer order request.
Agree design.
Agree finance agreement.
Provide customer with finance agreement.
Provide customer with contractual terms and conditions (cancellation policy).
Get both signed.
Wait 14 days for finance cooling off period.
Purchase materials and start build.

If at that point the customer wanted to cancel it would be under the terms and conditions within the contract.

If they cancelled before I’m not out of pocket.

There’s a reason for 14 day cooling off periods. This thread is an example of why they exist.

True, but not relevant to this agreement.

Other than you right to cancel finance within 14 days without penalty. Which is infringed upon because it’s intrinsically linked to goods being ordered before the cooling off period for the finance has passed.

:roll: It’s not making a bespoke cabinet, or your industry.

Nope, the contract says it’s a risk the buyer takes on.

Can’t sign away your rights.

…but it doesn’t cancel the costs associated with ordering the car. (Unless I’m missing something.)

Which is a risk you take as a business owner with a business model that relies on leveraging goods and services. Or you wait 2 weeks for the finance cooling off period (which is there for a reason) and you don’t have these issues.

I’d be interested to know what happens when you order a car from the factory and exchange rates change increasing the cost of the vehicle? Does this get passed to the consumer / trader / broker or does the manufacturer guarantee the price for factory orders?

I suspect they do, and in the unlikely event the Mods say they should post the OPs name then Ling still won’t post it.

What’s it got to do with the Mods?

I reserve the right to name and shame if he continues to lie. Well… of couse I still do.

but I suspect the firm selling cars knows the rules about selling cars

You’d suspect a firm collecting and keeping peoples data would know the rules about collecting and keeping peoples data as well.

Or that a business owner would be aware of their businesses finances (watch the dragons den video).

Just saying…

The ironic thing is, it’ll likely cost the OP more than £500+VAT to get a solicitor’s advice on the sitch anyway

Which is why questionable business practices unfortunately go unchallenged.

This post shows the modern disease: an example is that someone thinks they can order a specced £30k+ car and have no consequences. People need to accept IT’S A BIG THING TO ORDER, and get a grip.

You’re right capitalism and the materialistic nature of society are a disease, not necessarily a modern one. So are people who exploit it for their own gain then cry foul when it doesn’t go their way; especially when they have the tools to operate in a way that absolves them from potential risks but choose not to use them.

14 day cooling off period. Legally entitled to cancel without penalty. You can write what you like in the paperwork; he cant sign away his legal rights, and it would be classed as an unfair contract term.

Your choice to run a risky business model; easy way to avoid it is not to order until 14 days has passed. But I guess sometimes £££ over ride common sense.

Speaking with the original practice should be your first port of call before worrying about suing people.

All vets have to provide some form of 24 hour cover – using that is generally the best idea as they will have your pets records and it’s likely to not cost you as much as going to a different practice.

It’s entirely plausible that the kitten has jumped off something / scratched / rubbed and torn it’s internal stitches. They don’t understand why things hurt or feel funny – they just do cat things and you get to deal with the consequences – shit happens and it’s not always negligence.

I would expect you vet to have a complaints procedure should you not be able to resolve it amicably – again talk to them.

How the delete button on my keyboard interacts with email software.

They were in the middle of the trail and the video that was posted stops at where they were standing

Wait they were stood on the track that you can see for like 15 seconds and you just barely missed them? I’d take up golf if I were you.

Gotta find someway to make up for the losses on all those warranty reverbs and creaky pikes *not cynical*

:roll:

Are we laughing about how my point about a sample size of 1 not being big enough to draw an accurate conclusion is proven by illustrating that my sample size of 1 has a totally different outcome.

Hence ‘balance your anecdotal evidence?’ (yes I’m aware I left an extra word).

Or are you just trying to be edgy and cool whilst demonstrating poor reading comprehension?

Not going to validate your opinion OP. Seems like you fishing for STW to back you up.

Sample size not big enough for you to draw conclusions.

Amateur napkin physics and bio mechanics are not a legit method for basing assumptions about method and extent of injury.

Children have been strangled by drawstrings on hoods – have you removed all the drawstrings from their clothes?

You’ve failed to account for one of the largest factors in accidents – other people (especially dribbling shit weasels in cars).

I’m glad the helmet I cracked in half was on my head and it wasn’t my skull that hit a rock. That was falling off forwards and landing on my arms first just to balance your the anecdotal evidence.

I wouldn’t worry lusty. Nobrainsinthehead struggles with the concept of personal responsibility, and how the actions of a few give a negative impression of the entire community.

Which is why organizations can’t be bothered to consult with them, and just get on it with. People ain’t got time to deal with 12 year old children on bikes masquerading as adults.

Did they say who were giving them issues?

Probably some knee jerking drama queens with limited social skills that leads to an inability to ask sensible questions to the right people before mouthing off / posting on forums.

Assholes how dare they try to make the countryside more accessible to others!

good chart – shows that impact of Brexshit has been limited so far

No it doesn’t. It shows that at some point in 2016 the pound was at a 168 year low using the ‘effective exchange rate’ metric.

Making things up to suit your agenda – sign of a valid well-thought out position right?

Have you actually discussed the issue with your employer?

Have you even been asked to go?

Or are you going into meltdown because your boss is a twunt?

I used to find doing the red to be a bit of a drag and only used it to link up cheeky stuff.

I would take the climb from the car park. At the top the blue and red split so follow the blue, you can head over the addestone/dixons from there.

Mess about on the jumps or do a loop of the world cup track (the big features all have easier B lines, or they are short bus stops that leave and join the same fireroad).

From Dixons take the red to the riggs and dales section, parts are shared blue and red but tbh it’s all the same difficulty.

Theres a newish blue final descent that splits off so do that, then when you reach the track at the bottom instead of turning left to the little skills area, go right and back up the hill to pickup the red again (it crosses the track) and then do the final red descent back to the car park.

I would say white’s is more difficult than 99.5% of Dalby.

3 stages in and -1 brake lever, rear mech, and chain. Went to the bar and drunk cider.

Shit entitled dog owners being shit and entitled.

Body language should never be an issue as a dog owner should never put you in the position where it would matter.

This is why we can’t have nice things, or better access rights…

There’s a right way and a wrong way to go about these things, and making a landowner have to take on the liability / financial impact for some shitty trails is not the right way.

“No impact on him”….apart from the possibility of a multi-million pound law suit should someone have an accident.

It’ll be nice once golf becomes the in thing for twunts again…

The rest of the world manages just fine with WTO tariffs

Liar. They manage just fine with reciprocal free trade agreements neighbor states, large consumer economies, and membership of things like APEC and NAFTA.

Seems the rest of the world didn’t get your memo.

The rest of the world manages just fine not being in the EU, no freedom of movement etc etc.

Manages just fine how?

Because there’s nowhere I can think of comparable in size to the UK, with our limited natural resources, reliance on foreign low skilled workers etc that has a standard of living that’s even remotely similar?

Obviously when your floating around in your yacht and the only interest you have in the rest of society is how much more money you can rape out of them I can see how you’d think that. But perhaps try takng your head out of your arse before you choke on your own shit and realise not everyone is in the same privileged position you are.

Not surprising he did that as its all in here

Used a blind bearing puller when I did it to a frame bearing.

Too much grease and its blocking the air transfer port on the air spring side (assuming its the same as pikes and is a small dimple inside the stanchion).

Same for me. The last update has bollocksed my 640, somewhat frustrating.

Are you really that dense? Do I need to use smaller words?

There’s no such thing as a ‘dedicated bike trail’ solely for cycling on open access land (all FC land, commons etc), its a nonsense term. They are permissive, and inherently SHARED; anyone can use them on foot (including with push chairs, and dogs) that is their LEGAL RIGHT. Your analogies are crap and just show your total inability to comprehend the situation

It is entirely YOUR responsibility as the rider to not injure people by riding in a way appropriate to the trail conditions. If that means you cant go flat out around blind bends or over blind drops then frankly tough shit use you brakes a ride at an appropriate speed that enables you to stop in the distance you can see.

If you don’t like it you can buy your own land and ride like a self entitled cockwomble to your hearts content. But in public places (including trail centre ‘cycling’ trails) you should give a bit of consideration to others or at least the potential for others to be using it.

And people wonder why there’s such opposition to greater bike access, you 3 are a prime example of why.

No it wouldn’t. ‘Dedicated downhill track’ has absolutely no meaning what so ever to most of the population and certainly nothing legally that exempts you from your responsibilities; you may as well call it the ‘jumpy mcjumpface super awesome trail’ it means the same thing (nothing).

In fact you’ll probably find access to that site is under the CRoW act and cycling is merely permissive, in which case people have every right to walk it much like they do to cross the road. He could call it a ‘walking up cos I can track’ and would likely have a better claim than the bike rider.

A track day is on private land, doesn’t involve members of the public being able to go anywhere they like, large parts of it are fenced to prevent public access, and they’ll have staff / Marshalls out – I’m not sure how you struggle with this concept; its either ignorance or idiocy (I know which one I’m leaning towards).

There’s little point in me getting into this with you when you have such a poor grasp on access laws / liability. I do hope your insured for riding your bike as you may find it costly if you have an incident like this.

I’m going for pedestrian for not checking the road was clear

I’m surprised its not the baby robins fault – along with poverty, war, and Theresa May.

Jamesfts, I am confused. Perhaps you could provide us with the agreed legal definition of a ‘DH track’ and reference the legislation where places with this designation absolve its users from taking any personal responsibility for their actions?

As you like car analogies I’ve got a pertinent one: If you drive your car around a blind bend at a speed that makes you unable to stop for a pedestrian crossing the road who’s to blame? The same applies to bikes.

I’m not sure a defence of ‘it was his fault for walking where he was legally entitled to do so’ will get you very far.

Perhaps a solution to this conundrum is sight lines and feature placement should be carefully thought about. Just an idea.

Street lights present assume its 30. If it’s anything else there will be a big sign, but also small signs (repeaters) at short intervals. So if your unsure slow to 30, if you see a repeater saying 40 after 100 metres you can speed up.

Slightly ironic that the HSE leaflet has a guy wearing a hi vis vest that’s likely to get snagged on a saw in it’s PPE section.